Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Facebook, Inc. [2021] FCA 244

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Facebook, Inc. [2021] FCA 244

The Court granted the interlocutory application because it was satisfied that interim confidentiality protection was appropriate for commercially sensitive material, that the Court had jurisdiction over ACCC claims arising under the Competition and Consumer Act and the Australian Consumer Law, that the proceeding was within r 10.42, that the ACCC had a prima facie case that the respondents made false, misleading or deceptive representations to Australian consumers about Onavo Protect, and that service by international registered post under art 10(a) of the Hague Convention and substituted service by email to King & Wood Mallesons were appropriate and practicable in light of the Hague...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Proceeding Alleging Contraventions of the Australian Consumer Law / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Serve Outside Australia, Substituted Service, and Interim Suppression and Non Publication Orders, Determined on the Papers
Outcome
Interlocutory application granted.
Legal Topics
['australian Consumer Law' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'false or Misleading Representations' 'service Outside Australia' 'hague Convention' 'substituted Service' 'suppression and Non Publication Orders']
['practice and Procedure' 'competition and Consumer Law'] ['australian Consumer Law' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'false or Misleading Representations' 'service Outside Australia' 'hague Convention' 'substituted Service' 'suppression and Non Publication Orders']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Proceeding Alleging Contraventions of the Australian Consumer Law / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Serve Outside Australia, Substituted Service, and Interim Suppression and Non Publication Orders, Determined on the Papers

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether interim suppression or non-publication orders should be made under ss 37AF and 37AI of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth).' 'Whether the ACCC should be granted leave under rr 10.42, 10.43(2) and 10.44 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) to serve the respondents outside Australia in accordance with art 10(a) of the Hague Convention.' 'Whether the Court had jurisdiction, the proceeding was of a kind mentioned in r 10.42, and the ACCC had a prima facie case for the relief claimed.' 'Whether substituted service by email under r 10.24 of the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) should be permitted.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court granted the interlocutory application because it was satisfied that interim confidentiality protection was appropriate for commercially sensitive material, that the Court had jurisdiction over ACCC claims arising under the Competition and Consumer Act and the Australian Consumer Law, that the proceeding was within r 10.42, that the ACCC had a prima facie case that the respondents made false, misleading or deceptive representations to Australian consumers about Onavo Protect, and that service by international registered post under art 10(a) of the Hague Convention and substituted service by email to King & Wood Mallesons were appropriate and practicable in light of the Hague...

Court Disposition

Interlocutory application granted.

Orders

  • ["Pursuant to s 37AI of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth), on the ground set out in s 37AG(1)(a), until the conclusion of the first case management hearing at which the first, second or third respondents appear, or further order, the information in Confidential Exhibit TLB-2 to the affidavit of Tom...