Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Kogan Australia Pty Ltd [2020] FCA 1004 File number: VID 544 of 2019
Judge: DAVIES J
Date of judgment: 17 July 2020
Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – false and misleading statements and misleading and deceptive conduct under the Australian Consumer Law – where respondent advertised 10% coupon code discount for limited period – where respondent increased prices prior to promotion and decreased prices after promotion – promotion advertised through electronic direct marketing material and SMS messages – promotion advertised in parallel with two-price comparison promotions – statements in marketing material conveyed representation that consumers would receive genuine 10% discount by reference to the price at which goods were advertised for sale for a "reasonable period" before and after the promotion – representations false and misleading and respondent's conduct misleading and deceptive in respect of a subset of products to which the coupon code promotion applied
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) s 155, Sch 2, Australian Consumer Law (Cth) ss 18, 29 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) s 140 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
Cases cited: Allied Pastoral Holdings Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation [1983] 1 NSWLR 1 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Limited [2014] FCA 634; 317 ALR 73 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Dukemaster Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 682 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v TPG Internet Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 54; 250 CLR 640 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v We Buy Houses Pty Ltd [2017] FCA 915 Australian Competition Consumer Commission v Woolworths Limited [2019] FCA 1039 Bodum v DKSH Australia Pty Limited [2011] FCAFC 98; 280 ALR 639 Briginshaw v Briginshaw [1938] HCA 34; 60 CLR 336 Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 Campomar Sociedad, Limitada v Nike International Limited [2000] HCA 12; 202 CLR 45 Google Inc v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2013] HCA 1; 249 CLR 435 National Exchange Pty Ltd v Australian Securities and Investments Commission [2004] FCAFC 90; 49 ASCR 369 Parkdale Custom Built Furniture Pty Ltd v Puxu Pty Ltd [1982] HCA 44; 149 CLR 191 Specsavers Pty Ltd v The Optical Superstore Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 692 Taco Company of Australia Inc v Taco Bell Pty Ltd [1982] FCA 136; 42 ALR 177
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