Nick Dowse Misleading or Deceptive Practices
Misleading or Deceptive Practices – Structure of Answer
1. Issue: “[Plaintiff] can bring an action for [damages/injunction/other orders] under s [82/80/87] TPA
for a contravention of s [52/etc] TPA.”
2. STOP: Check is this a financial service or a code of conduct?
a. If there’s a possibility that the corporation has contravened an industry code (ie franchising
code of conduct) go to “Codes of Conduct” notes.
b. If there is a “financial service” being supplied, Part V TPA does not apply (s 51AF(1)) go
to “Financial Services” notes.
i. A financial service is providing financial product advice, dealing in financial products
etc (managed investment schemes, derivates, supply of credit like mortgage etc)).
ii. Note further complication: certain dealings in securities are dealt with under the
Corps Act (not ASIC Act or TPA).
iii. Full definition in “Financial Services” notes.
3. Note also the other prohibitions in Part V Div 1 TPA (point out which ones are relevant, tests are
the same as for s 52 TPA):
a. False or misleading representations (s 53)
i. Corporation shall not, in trade or commerce, in connexion with supply/promotion of
goods/services (supply = sale, lease, hire, hire purchase, provide, grant or confer (s
1. Falsely represent that goods are of a particular standard, quality, value,
grade, style or model, or have had a particular history or previous use (s
i. Label saying “banana mango” but in smaller print “flavoured” =
rep that it had real banana = contravention of s 53(a) and s 55
(ACCC v Cadbury Schweppes).
i. If make a positive performance claim but no scientific basis for
claim = contravention of s 53(a) (Colgate v Rexona).
i. If label says 50% wool but actually has less than 50% wool =
contravention of s 53(a) (Wilkinson v Katies Fasions)
ii. Packet says “beef steak pies” but actually made of sheep mince
= breach of s 53(a) (Adams v Eta Foods).
2. Falsely represent that goods are new (s 53(b))
a. Car described as new but was in fact 2 years 9 months old, but only
other two options on order form were “demo” or “used”, of which it was
neither = no false representation that good was new, was only used in
contradistinction to the other two options (need to look at context)
(Annand v TPC).
i. Possible meanings for new:
1. Not previously sold by retail
2. Not second hand
3. Current not superseded model
4. Of recent origin
5. Suffered a measure of damage but repaid and now
3. Represent that goods/services have sponsorship, approval, performance
characteristics, accessories, uses or benefits they do not have (s 53(c) & (d))
4. Make a false or misleading representation with respect to the price of
goods/services (s 53(e))
a. Where there is a price tag with the WAS price crossed out and then a
new NOW price written in, it will be misleading if the product was never
Page 1 of 15 Nick Dowse Misleading or Deceptive Practices
offered for sale at the WAS price (ACCC v StoresOnline per Edmonds
b. Things like “limited time offer” etc that are not actually for a limited time
will contravene s 53(e) (ACCC v StoresOnline per Edmonds J).
5. Make false/misleading representation about availability of facilities for
repairs/spare parts (s 53(ea))
6. False/misleading rep concerning the place of origin (s 53(eb))
7. False/misleading rep about the need for goods/services (s 53(f))
8. False/misleading rep about existence, exclusion or effect of any condition,
warranty, guarantee, right or remedy (s 53(g)).
a. For example, where a corporation misrepresents that a refund is not
available or include an exclusion of liability clause that contravenes s
68 and s 68A TPA.
b. False representations or undue influence in relation to land (s 53A)
i. Must not:
1. (a) represent that the corporation has a sponsorship, approval or affiliation it
does not have;
2. (b) make a false or misleading representation concerning the nature of the
interest in the land, the price payable for the land, the location of the land, the
characteristics of the land, the use to which the land is capable of being put
or may lawfully be put or the existence or availability of facilities associated
with the land; or
3. (c) offer gifts, prizes or other free items with the intention of not providing
them or of not providing them as offered.
c. Misleading conduct in relation to employment (s 53B)
i. Must not engage in conduct that is liable to mislead persons seeking the
employment as to the availability, nature, terms or conditions of, or any other matter
relating to, the employment (s 53B).
d. Misleading conduct as to nature, manufacturing process, characteristics or suitability for
purpose of goods/services (s 55/55A)
i. A person shall not, in trade or commerce, engage in conduct that is liable to mislead
the public as to the nature, the manufacturing process, the characteristics, the
suitability for their purpose or the quantity of any goods (s 55, use 55A for services).
e. Misleading representations about business activities (s 59)
i. Concerning the profitability or risk or any other material aspect of any business
activity that the corporation has represented as one that can be, or can be to a
considerable extent, carried on at or from a person’s place of residence (s 59(1)).
ii. Where a corporation, in trade or commerce, invites persons to engage or participate,
in a business activity requiring the performance by the persons concerned of work,
or the investment of moneys by the persons concerned and the performance by
them of work associated with the investment, the corporation shall not make, with
respect to the profitability or risk or any other material aspect of the business
activity, a representation that is false or misleading in a material particular (s 59(2)).
4. Overview of elements of s 52 action:
a. Defendant must be a corporation, or a natural person caught by s 6; and
b. Conduct involved must occur “in trade or commerce”; and
c. Conduct must be “misleading or deceptive” or be “likely to mislead or deceive”.
5. Is the defendant a corporation or natural person caught by the TPA?
a. Defined in s 4(1) TPA to include:
i. (a) is a foreign corporation;
1. A corporation incorporated outside Australia.
ii. (b) is a trading corporation formed within the limits of Australia or is a financial
corporation so formed;
1. To determine whether a corporation is a “trading corporation” need to use the
Page 2 of 15 Nick Dowse Misleading or Deceptive Practices
current activities test (Hughes v WACA).
a. Trading denotes providing goods or services for reward”
b. Must be “substantial” trading in relation to corporation’s overall
activities, but not necessarily its sole or main activity.
i. Can still be a “trading corporation” if your core business does
not result in “reward” but you still receive a large proportion of
revenue from other trading activities (E v Australian Red Cross).
2. A “financial corporation” is also defined in s 4(1) to mean:
a. Banking (other than state banking)
i. Must be interstate banking
b. Insurance (other than state insurance)
i. Must be interstate insurance
c. Lending or borrowing money, as distinct from transactions that merely
involve the use of money (Ku-ring-gai Co-op Building Society (No 12))
d. Needs to be significant activities but not necessarily sole or main
e. The term “financial corporation” is not a term of act, no special or
settled legal meaning; merely describes a corporation which engages
in financial activities or is intended to do so (State Superannuation
Board v TPC).
iii. (c) is incorporated in a Territory; or
1. A company incorporated in Australian Capital Territory or Northern Territory.
iv. (d) is the holding company of a body corporate of a kind above.
b. Can also apply to natural persons
i. Part V TPA extends to the engaging in conduct outside Australia by bodies
corporate incorporated or carrying on business within Australia or by Australian
citizens or persons ordinarily resident within Australia (s 5(1)).
ii. The effect of s 6(2)(a) is to extend the operation of Part V TPA to:
1. Conduct overseas where the person involved is an Australian citizen (s 6(2)
2. Conduct occurring in interstate trade or commerce (s 6(2)(a)(ii)); or
3. Conduct occurring in trade or commerce in a territory, between a state and
territory, or between two territories (s 6(2)(a)(iii)); or
4. Conduct supplying goods or services to the Commonwealth (s 6(2)(a)(iv)).
iii. The effect of s 6(3) is to widen a reference to a “corporation” as including an
individual (s 6(3)(b)) where that individual uses “postal, telegraphic or telephonic
services” (s 6(3)(a)).
1. i.e. where natural person uses telephone, internet, radio advertisement or
c. Can also apply to the Commonwealth Crown
i. TPA applies to the Commonwealth Crown “in so far as [it] carries on a business”
whether that be directly, or by an authority of the Commonwealth (s 2A(1) TPA).
1. An authority of Commonwealth is:
a. A statutory corporation (s 4(1)); or
b. Corporation in which a statutory corporation has a controlling interest
ii. The effect of s 2A(2) is to apply the TPA as if the Crown (or its authority) were a
iii. The Crown is sometimes referred to as the “government” – it is a separate legal
1. Includes the executive branch of government, represented by the Ministries
and Departments and officers who attend to its business
2. Government departments are not separate legal entities (but they are still the
Page 3 of 15 Nick Dowse Misleading or Deceptive Practices
iv. Three-step analysis to determine if government body is caught
1. Step 1: Is the relevant entity the Crown?
a. Does it enjoy the rights and privileges of the crown?
b. If it is a statutory corporation it is necessary to have regard to the
particular legislation under which it was constituted to determine
whether it has the status of the Crown
c. If the statute is silent, this suggests that the corporation is not the
Crown. As a matter of statutory construction, it seems that the courts
will require a clear indication that the corporation is the Crown
2. Step 2: If it is the Crown, does it carry on a business?
a. Instrumentality providing government printing services, crown decides
to sell it off as a one-time measure = not carrying on a business, not a
substantial activity (J S McMillan v Cwth)
b. Cwth contracting for goods/services for its own use = not carrying on
business, public procurement in nature (GEC Marconi Systems)
i. Note: criticism from Finn J:
1. ‘Government contracting (in procurement and otherwise)
is of major significance in the economic life of this
country… It is somewhat surprising, that when the State
enters the market place to acquire goods or services, it
should exempt itself from those norms of conduct
considered appropriate to the conduct of trade and
commerce that it has imposed upon the private sector as
3. Step 3: If it is the Crown and does carry on a business (steps 1 and 2
satisfied), does one the exemptions apply?
a. Exemptions in s 2C TPA:
i. Imposing or collecting taxes (s 2C(1)(a)(i)), or levies (s 2C(1)(a)
(ii)), or fees for licences (s 2C(1)(a)(iii)); or
ii. Crown bodies that merely grant licences in relation to
goods/services (s 2C(1)(b) + 2C(3))
1. Taxi licences = exempt
2. Operate private hospitals = exempt
3. Licence/permit to acquire goods/services = NOT exempt
iii. Wholly intra- or inter-governmental transactions (s 2C(1)(c)).
b. State or territory crowns are not bound by Part V TPA (s 2B).
i. But s 7 FTA (Qld) still applies to QLD Crown.
6. Is the conduct in “trade or commerce”?
a. Generally requires conduct to be commercial in nature.
b. Consumer transactions involving acquisition of goods/services from a business will always
occur in trade or commerce.
c. Most things will occur in “trade or commerce” so it’s easier to just list what’s NOT trade and
i. Personal tractions (private sale of property) (Argy v Blunts)
1. Business-like steps could not convert a sale of a private residence into trade
2. However, if lending money at commercial interest rates, or investing in
property may come within “trade and commerce”.
ii. Lectures about religious matters (Plimer v Roberts)
iii. Olympic selection (amateur sport) (Forbes v Aust Yachting Federation)
iv. Educational and political campaigns (Orion v RSPCA (Vic))
v. Misleading statement by one employee to another in the course of construction work
on building site (Concrete v Nelson)
d. An employee may be liable under the state equivalent (s 9 FTA) if employer engaged in
Page 4 of 15 Nick Dowse Misleading or Deceptive Practices
trade or commerce and conduct occurred in the course of trade or commerce.
e. Must take place “in” trade and commerce
i. Not merely connected with or incidental to trade or commerce (Hearne v O’Rourke).
f. Includes almost all external transactions or communications carried out to further
commercial interests. This includes trade between Australia and outside Australia (s 4(1)
g. Provision of professional services (lawyers, accountants, doctors etc) can come within
“trade and commerce” (Bond v Theiss).
h. Government policy statements or announcements are unlikely to occur in trade or
commerce (Unilan Holdings v Kerrin).
i. But if designed to encourage commercial transaction with crown, may come within.
i. The trade or commerce complained of does not need to be that of the defendant
(Houghton v Arms).
7. Is the conduct misleading or deceptive?
a. The test for whether conduct is misleading or deceptive was set down in Parkdale v Puxu
per Gibbs CJ @ 199:
i. Whether the conduct is likely to mislead a reasonable member of the class at which
the conduct is directed.
ii. This is an objective question of law for the court.
iii. Not necessary to prove anyone was actually misled.
iv. No consideration of subjective intention of defendant to mislead or not.
v. Not enough for the conduct to merely cause a person to be confused or uncertain.
1. Advertisements for wine describing them as “Big Mac” = not misleading,
members of class would only wonder, not be misled (McWilliams v
vi. STATE THE CLASS OF PERSONS.
vii. In advertising context:
1. Identify a hypothetical individual, an ordinary or reasonable representative
member of the class, who takes reasonable care of their own interests
(Campomar v Nike).
2. Disregard conduct that is: (Campomar v Nike)
a. Extreme or fanciful (eg extreme or fanciful assumptions); and
b. Merely causes wonderment or confusion.
3. Where a manufacturer always uses the same colour (ie purple) on its
products, but other manufacturers in the same field use the same or similar
shades, there will only be confusion, not misleading or deceptive conduct
(Cadbury Schweppes v Darrell Lea).
4. Expert opinions based on market research of consumer behaviour will rarely
be of assistance (Cadbury v Darrell Lea per Heerey J).
b. In answer, address:
i. Context in which the conduct occurs;
1. Refer to remaining words appearing in a written text, or conversation and any
surround circumstance which has a bearing on the proper interpretation to be
placed on the conduct.
a. NOTE: restricted to material the existence or significance of which
would have been reasonably apparent to member of class. Doesn’t
extend to all material which, although available, would not have been
considered by a reasonable member of the class (National Exchange
2. Common assumptions by parties prior to conduct (ie party assumes
mortgage limited in amount, but was in fact unlimited) (Money v Westpac)
3. Remaining parts of an advertisement (where argumentative but expressing
opinions and conclusions about merits of takeover, not misleading in context)
(Industrial Equity v North Broken Hill)
Page 5 of 15 Nick Dowse Misleading or Deceptive Practices
4. Length and complexity of negotiations (statements designed to induce
purchase at or before start of negotiations not misleading where long
negotiations ensue) (Pappas v Soulac)
5. Existence of label identifying true manufacturer (selling copied furniture
resembling a different manufacturer not misleading because labelled correctly
as coming from a different manufacturer) (Parkdale v Puxu)
6. In advertising context:
a. The advertising medium used: was the target audience’s impression a
fleeting glance or did they have an opportunity for careful
i. Newspaper advertisements are more ephemeral (temporary),
and are usually used to raise interest rather than to used to
make a decision to purchase (ACCC v Telstra).
ii. Brochure: designed to be taken away and read with care prior
to making a decision (ACCC v Telstra).
iii. Television: maybe only 30 second impression, fleeting (R&C
Products v SC Johnson).
iv. Supermarket shelf: longer time available to consider.
b. A flyer distributed to children may not be misleading as they would
assume nothing more than the provenance of the poster as from the
trademark stamped on the poster – but if it was distributed to travel
agents, for example, it may well have been misleading (Honey v
i. Need to look at the context in which the advertisement is
presented – what is misleading in one context may not be in
c. Regard must be had to the overall impression the ad creates, and not
merely to the literal meaning of the words used (Tobacco Institute v
ii. Nature of target audience (are they dumb/unsophisticated or smart/sophisticated?);
1. Heavy burden imposed by the TPA will not operate to protect persons who
have failed to take reasonable care of their own interests (Campomar v Nike).
2. Initial question to be answered is whether the misconceptions or deceptions
alleged to arise are properly attributable to the ordinary or reasonable
members of the classes of prospective purchasers (Campomar v Nike).
3. Consider the “astute and gullible, the intelligent and stupid, the well educated
as well as poorly educated, the men and women of various ages pursuing a
variety of vocations” in the class (Taco Co v Taco Bell per Deane and
Fitzgerald JJ @ 202).
4. The more vulnerable the target audience, the greater the likelihood of there
being misleading conduct.
5. In advertising context:
a. Mobile telephone services: wide cross-section, but not as wide as for a
necessity of life (ACCC v Telstra).
i. “$0 and $0 upfront” = $0 is misleading because was a handset
bundled with telephony services, for which there was a charge.
$0 upfront not misleading because it was true.
b. Furniture advertisements pitched at sophisticated buyers of upmarket
design furniture, not to a single individual, but to the public at large
(Parkdale v Puxu).
c. Pitching to teenagers by producing unauthorised copies of official
INXS merch = target audience is vulnerable teenagers who are
unlikely to check labelling (labelling revealed it was unauthorised but
this not enough) (INXS v South Sea Bubble).
Page 6 of 15 Nick Dowse Misleading or Deceptive Practices
i. Important to consider target audience’s age.
d. Where flyer distributed to children, the target audience will be very
unsophisticated (Honey v Australian Airlines)
e. Email sent to specialist sales staff of major retailers = target audience
will be sophisticated, harder to show misleading (Hoover v Email).
i. But they can still be misled if the comparative advertising used
in the email is false (filling washing machine with lead instead of
clothes to make it malfunction)
f. Ad in medical magazine distributed to doctors = very sophisticated
target audience, confined to doctors, not general public (Astrazeneca
iii. Whether private negotiations between buyers/sellers, or conduct directed at public
1. If to public at large, wider class, easier to show reasonable member likely to
iv. Focus on erroneous assumption by audience, as opposed to conduct of the
v. Each case turns on its own facts.
vi. In advertising context:
1. Must consider the advertisement in its entirety (Tobacco Institute v AFCO)
a. If have a bald statement of fact that readers would consider as such,
although they may only read it fleetingly and not make close study of it,
risk of being misleading if not true (Tobacco Institute v AFCO).
i. Advertisement in print on risks of passive smoking said “little
evidence (and none that proves scientifically) that smoke
causes disease in non-smokers”
ii. Can’t argue that it’s a mere opinion if you state it as fact.
2. Must consider the nature of the transaction, its value, what the product is
a. Pharmaceutical product = scrutinised closely
b. Expensive products = scrutinised closely (Country Road v Najee).
c. Impulse buyers not inclined to scrutinise ads with meticulous care …
consumers cannot be expected to critically approach ads relating to
small value transactions (Roses Only v Mark Lyons)
d. More expensive = less likely to mislead.
c. No need for a representation of some kind, though that is the normal case which presents
itself under s 52 (S&I Publishing v Aust Surf Life Saving).
d. Case examples:
i. Copying and selling unauthorised copies of very expensive furniture = target
audience: people looking to buy expensive furniture, sophisticated purchasers,
would have checked authenticity = not misleading (Parkdale v Puxu)
ii. Manufacturing fragrance sold as “Nike Sports Fragrance” but not made by Nike, sold
in pharmacies beside other fragrances including Adidas = target audience:
prospective purchasers of mass-marketed product for general use, not particularly
sophisticated = misleading, likely to be misled that was made by Nike or under
Nike’s licence (Campomar v Nike)
iii. Small real estate business makes mistake placing swimming pool inside freehold
but in fact it was partly outside freehold, was very expensive property, had
disclaimer saying “do not guarantee accuracy” = target audience: purchasers of
expensive property, very sophisticated = not misleading because reasonable
purchaser in class that small suburban real estate agent would not independently
verify details, not source, merely passing info on (Butcher v Lachlan Elder).
iv. Offer to shareholders to buy shares at a very good price, but fine print says payment
in instalments over 15 years (so not that good a deal after all) = target audience:
mum and dad investors, not sophisticated = misleading representation even though
Page 7 of 15 Nick Dowse Misleading or Deceptive Practices
literally true, qualified in fine print which was