Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Limited [2015] FCA 330 Citation: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Limited [2015] FCA 330
Parties: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION v COLES SUPERMARKETS AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED
File number: VID 475 of 2013
Judge: ALLSOP CJ
Date of judgment: 10 April 2015
Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – pecuniary penalties – relevant matters – loss and damage – whether absence of evidence mitigating factor – relevance of purpose – Australian Consumer Law s 224(2)(a) CONSUMER LAW – pecuniary penalties – relevant matters – finding by a court that offender had previously engaged in similar conduct – whether breach of Australian Consumer Law, Part 2-2 similar to breach of Part 3-1
Legislation: Australian Consumer Law ss 18, 21, 22, 29, 33, 224, Part 2-2, Part 3-1, Part 5-2 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Sch 2 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 557 Spam Act 2003 (Cth) s 25
Cases cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Coles Supermarkets (Australia) Pty Limited [2014] FCA 634; 317 ALR 73 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Coles Supermarkets (Australia) Pty Limited (No 2) [2014] FCA 1022 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1405 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dataline.Net.Au Pty Ltd (in liquidation) [2007] FCAFC 146; 161 FCR 513 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v EnergyAustralia Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 274 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Global One Mobile Entertainment Limited [2011] FCA 393 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Leahy (No 3) [2005] FCA 265; 215 ALR 301 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v MSY Technology Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 382; 279 ALR 609 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Reebok Australia Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 83 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Singtel Optus Pty Ltd (No 4) [2011] FCA 761; 282 ALR 246 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Telstra Corporation Ltd [2010] FCA 790; 188 FCR 238 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v TPG Internet Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 54; 250 CLR 640 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Turi Foods Pty Ltd (No 5) [2013] FCA 1109 Barbaro v The Queen [2014] HCA 2; 305 ALR 323 Director of Public Prosecutions v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194; 79 NSWLR 1 Hili v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Matthews v The Queen [2014] VSCA 291 NW Frozen Foods Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (1996) 71 FCR 285 Singtel Optus Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2012] FCAFC 20; 287 ALR 249 TPG Internet Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2012] FCAFC 190; 210 FCR 277 Trade Practices Commission v CSR Limited [1991] ATPR 41-076 Trade Practices Commission v Mobil Oil Australia Ltd (1984) 4 FCR 296
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