Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Universal Sports Challenge Ltd

[2002] FCA 1276

Federal Court of Australia

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Trade Practices
2. › Consumer protection
3. › Misleading or deceptive conduct
4. › Representations with respect to future matters
5. › Accessorial liability
6. › Whether person knowingly concerned in corporation's contravention
7. › Knowledge of essential facts constituting contravention
8. › Whether wilful blindness sufficient
9. › Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), ss 51A, 52, 54, 80(1)(e)
1. Trade Practices
2. › Consumer protection
3. › Misleading or deceptive conduct
4. › Representations with respect to future matters
5. › Deeming provision
6. › Whether s 51A(2) deeming applies against person other than corporation that made representation
7. › Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), s 51A(2)
1. Trade Practices
2. › Consumer protection
3. › Offering prizes with intention of not providing them
4. › Promotion of sporting events
5. › Whether corporation offered prizes with intention of not providing them
6. › Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), s 54

Quick Take

The deeming provision in s 51A(2) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), which deems a corporation not to have had reasonable grounds for a representation about a future matter, applies only against the corporation that made the representation and cannot be used against a person alleged to have been knowingly concerned in or party to the contravention. Allegations of 'wilful blindness' require proof that the person deliberately shut their eyes to the relevant facts, not merely that they could have made further enquiries.