Rouse Lawyers

- The Law Firm For Business Owners and Entrepreneurs -

Call us: (07) 3648 9900

  • Home
  • Expertise
    • Corporate & Commercial
    • Private Wealth & Tax
    • Franchising
    • Technology
    • Intellectual Property
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Employment Law
    • Estate Planning
    • Property Law
  • About
    • Our Team
  • Reviews
  • Articles
  • Careers
  • Legal Guide
  • Contact

Australian Consumer Law & Advertising Practices: The Dominant Message – Get it right or risk being fined

On 12 December 2013, the High Court by a 4 – 1 majority, sent a clear message to advertisers to be careful in ensuring that the dominant message of their advertising and marketing is not misleading and deceptive.  Advertisers can no longer rely on the fine print of an advertisement to avoid liability under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), where the dominant message of an advertisement is otherwise misleading or deceptive.

The decision offers greater protection to consumers who are targeted by bold and attractive advertising and clarifies the extent of advertisers’ obligations under the ACL. 

ACCC v TPG

In Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v TPG Internet Pty Ltd,1 the High Court reinstated a $2 million pecuniary penalty imposed on TPG for a misleading advertising campaign about TPG’s unlimited broadband bundle.

In its $8.9 million advertising campaign, TPG ran this headline: “Unlimited ADSL2+ for $29.99 per month”.  However, the price in the headline was only available for consumers who bundled the broadband service with a home phone service for a total of $59.99 per month.  The pricing condition, including set up charges and the minimum length of the contract, were less prominently displayed than the headline advertising and appeared in the fine print of the advertisement.

At first instance, the trial judge found that the advertisements were misleading and deceptive and contravened sections 18 and 29 of the ACL, and that the total price of the service contravened section 48 of the ACL.

On appeal to the Full Federal Court, the Full Court overturned the trail judge’s finding and held that the advertisement was not misleading or deceptive.

On appeal to the High Court, the High Court held that the Full Court erred in its finding and reinstated the trial judge’s finding that the advertisement was misleading and deceptive in contravention of the ACL.  Critical to the High Court’s finding was the ‘dominant message’ test in determining whether an advertisement is misleading and deceptive.

The High Court found that the dominant message of TPG’s advertising had the ‘unremarkable consequence’ that a consumer might only absorb the general thrust or ‘dominant message’ of the advertisement and would not pay particular attention or have regard to the smaller fine print and details. The effect of this was that it caused consumers to contact TPG rather than one of its competitors on the basis of an “erroneous belief engendered by the general thrust of TPG’s message”.  Accordingly the High Court reinstated the $2 million pecuniary penalty imposed by the trial judge.

Implications of ACCC v TPG

Advertisers must be mindful of the ‘dominant message’ test in assessing whether their advertisements may be considered misleading or deceptive.

When advertising pricing information it is important to state an all inclusive price and ensure that any pricing conditions are clearly and prominently advertised.

Rouse Lawyers can assist you and your business in assessing and ensuring that your advertising complies with the ACL and is not misleading or deceptive.

Footnotes
1.[2013] HCA 54.

May 6, 2014 Filed Under: Commercial Litigation, Corporate & Commercial

Enter your details below to contact a professional Commercial Litigation lawyer.

↓

We add new contacts to Rouse Lawyers database. We may send you information or service offerings we believe may be relevant to you. If you agree to being contacted by us in the future, send your enquiry. Naturally, you can unsubscribe any time.

Client Reviews

"I would highly recommend Ben and the Rouse Lawyers team"

We are expanding our growing business into new areas. Ben Thorn took the time to understand our needs and delivered timely and expert advice. In addition to his coverage of the commercial transactions, Ben guided us through each step of the process of registering our trade mark. I would highly recommend Ben and the Rouse Lawyers team.

Jon MailerProtrade United

"Smooth, affordable and manageable"

“We recently engaged Rouse Lawyers to assist us in purchasing our first home. The support we received from Jesse Mason and his team was invaluable, easing the overwhelming emotions of being first time homebuyers. He supported us to understand both the land and home contracts, walking us through the process and promptly responding to any concerns, which made the whole process smooth, affordable and manageable”.

Nick JohnstonHitachi Construction Machinery (Australia) Pty Ltd

"We call upon Rouse Lawyers for their invaluable advice"

We have used Rouse Lawyers over the past 3 years, predominantly in our mergers and acquisitions activities. Matthew and his team understand the needs of larger family businesses, and their pragmatic and commercial approach to transactions is first class. From personal matters to large deals, we call upon Rouse Lawyers for their invaluable advice.

Tom FalkensteinTotal Records Management

PRIVACY POLICY DISCLAIMER TERMS

BRISBANE OFFICE

Ph: +61 7 3648 9900

Fx: +61 7 3648 9911

Level 2, 22 Wandoo St, Fortitude Valley, QLD 4006

17-Page Guide Reveals:

How To Protect Your Business and Your Assets While Allowing Your Business To Thrive

Written by Matthew Rouse, commercial lawyer and founder of Rouse Lawyers.

17-Page Guide Reveals:

How To Protect Your Business and Your Assets While Allowing Your Business To Thrive

Written by Matthew Rouse, commercial lawyer and founder of Rouse Lawyers.

Sign Up To Our Newsletter