Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
ACCC v Cotton On Kids Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 1428 Citation: ACCC v Cotton On Kids Pty Ltd [2012] FCA 1428
Parties: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION v COTTON ON KIDS PTY LTD (ACN 114 221 886) and COTTON ON CLOTHING PTY LTD (ACN 052 130 462)
File number: VID 1093 of 2011
Judge: TRACEY J
Date of judgment: 18 December 2012
Catchwords: CONSUMER PROTECTION – sale of children's nightwear that did not meet relevant safety standards – admitted contraventions of s 65C(1) of the Trace Practices Act 1974 (Cth) – admitted contraventions of ss 52, 53 and 55 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) – parties agreed as to facts, liability and penalties – whether declaratory relief available under circumstances – whether grant of injunctions appropriate – whether grant of probation order compliance program appropriate – whether agreed penalty should be imposed – mandatory considerations relevant to fixing of penalty – other considerations relevant to fixing of penalty
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), s 191 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), ss 52, 53, 55, 65C, 76E
Cases cited: ACCC v Midland Brick Company Pty Ltd (2004) 207 ALR 329 – cited ACCC v Danoz Direct Pty Ltd (2003) IPR 296 – considered, followed ACCC v Dataline.net.au Pty Ltd (2006) 236 ALR 665 – cited ACCC v Dimmeys Stores Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 372 – cited, considered, applied ACCC v Leahy Petroleum (No 3) (2005) 215 ALR 301 – applied ACCC v LG Electronics Australia Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 1118 – cited ACCC v Malaysia Airline System Berhad (No 2) [2012] FCA 767 – cited ACCC v Monza Imports Pty Ltd (2001) ATPR 41-843 – cited ACCC v MSY Technology Pty Ltd (No 2) (2011) 279 ALR 609 – considered, not followed ACCC v Real Estate Institute of Western Australia Inc (1999) 95 FCR 114 – considered, followed ACCC v Robinson [2011] FCA 17 – considered, followed ACCC v Smash Enterprises Pty Ltd, Spotlight Pty Ltd & Fantastic Furniture Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 375 – considered ACCC v Sontax Australia (1988) Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 1202 – considered ACCC v Target (2001) ATPR 41-840 – cited ACCC v Virgin Mobile Australia Pty Ltd (No 2) [2002] FCA 1548 – cited ACCC v Z-Tech Computers Pty Ltd (1997) 78 FCR 197 – cited Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Sampson [2011] FCA 1165 – referred to, considered Ainsworth v Criminal Justice Commission (1992) 175 CLR 564 – cited Eva v Mazda Motors (Sales) Pty Ltd (1977) ATPR 40-020 – considered, applied Forster v Jododex Australia Pty Ltd (1972) 127 CLR 421 – cited, considered ICI Australia Pty Ltd v Trade Practices Commission (1992) 38 FCR 248 – cited NW Frozen Foods Pty Ltd v ACCC (1996) 71 FCR 285 – cited, followed. Rural Press Limited v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (2003) 216 CLR 53 – cited Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank v British Bank for Foreign Trade Limited [1921] 2 AC 438 – cited Singtel Optus Pty Ltd v ACCC (2012) 287 ALR 249 – considered, applied
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate