Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Sensaslim Australia Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (No 1) [2011] FCA 1012

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Sensaslim Australia Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (No 1) [2011] FCA 1012

The Court continued the interim injunction against the fourth respondent because there was no disputed serious question to be tried for present purposes, the plain words of ss 5(1)(c) and 6(3) supported the injunction's extended or extraterritorial operation against an Australian citizen or resident where the relevant conduct involved telephonic services, and the discretionary matters raised did not persuasively weigh against continuation. The injunction was amended to clarify its statutory reach, to make the reasonable grounds qualification objective, and to narrow the clinical trial/scientific report restraint to what was necessary for interim relief.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Application for Continuation of an Interim Injunction Under the Australian Consumer Law / Interim Injunction Continuation Application
Outcome
Interim injunction against the fourth respondent continued in amended form; previous orders of 17 August 2011 ceased and substitute orders made; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['interim Injunctions' 'australian Consumer Law' 'extended or Extraterritorial Operation' 'misleading or Deceptive Representations' 'business Opportunity Representations' 'use of Internet and Telephonic Services']
['competition and Consumer Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['interim Injunctions' 'australian Consumer Law' 'extended or Extraterritorial Operation' 'misleading or Deceptive Representations' 'business Opportunity Representations' 'use of Internet and Telephonic Services']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Continuation of an Interim Injunction Under the Australian Consumer Law / Interim Injunction Continuation Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the interim injunction against the fourth respondent should be continued.' 'Whether the injunction should extend to conduct outside Australia by an Australian citizen or person ordinarily resident in Australia.' 'Whether the form of the injunction should clarify that reasonable grounds for representations are objectively determined.' 'Whether the condition concerning clinical trials and scientific reports was broader than necessary for interim relief.' 'Whether discretionary considerations, including the fourth respondent no longer working for the first respondent, justified refusing continuation of the injunction.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court continued the interim injunction against the fourth respondent because there was no disputed serious question to be tried for present purposes, the plain words of ss 5(1)(c) and 6(3) supported the injunction's extended or extraterritorial operation against an Australian citizen or resident where the relevant conduct involved telephonic services, and the discretionary matters raised did not persuasively weigh against continuation. The injunction was amended to clarify its statutory reach, to make the reasonable grounds qualification objective, and to narrow the clinical trial/scientific report restraint to what was necessary for interim relief.

Court Disposition

Interim injunction against the fourth respondent continued in amended form; previous orders of 17 August 2011 ceased and substitute orders made; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The orders made with respect to the fourth respondent on 17 August 2011 cease to have effect from 10.00 am on 31 August 2011 and substitute orders take effect.' "Until further or other order, the fourth respondent is restrained, in trade or commerce, whether in Australia or between Australia and places outside...