Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Black on White Pty Ltd & Ors [2001] FCA 187
The Court held that Black on White Pty Ltd engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct, and made false representations in contravention of ss 52, 53 and 55A of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), and engaged in unconscionable conduct under s 51AB by representing courses as accredited when they were not, and by making misleading claims as to consumer rights and deferred fee plans. Nicholas Poteri (fourth respondent), while not responsible for day-to-day management or authoring materials generally, was knowingly concerned in the misrepresentations about accreditation, due to his role as accreditation liaison officer and his knowledge of the facts. The company’s deregistration did not...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 06 March 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Post Trial Judgment
- Outcome
- Declaration and findings of fact granted against the third and fourth respondents; no declaration against the second respondent; no injunctions issued; directions made for preparation of orders and further hearing on costs.
- Legal Topics
- ['misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'accessorial Liability' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'injunctions' 'declarations']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Trial Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether Black on White Pty Ltd engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct and other contraventions under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)' 'Whether the individual respondents, including Nicholas Poteri, were knowingly concerned in, or parties to, contraventions by the company under s 75B of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)' 'The effect of deregistration of the company on accessorial liability and available remedies']
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that Black on White Pty Ltd engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct, and made false representations in contravention of ss 52, 53 and 55A of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), and engaged in unconscionable conduct under s 51AB by representing courses as accredited when they were not, and by making misleading claims as to consumer rights and deferred fee plans. Nicholas Poteri (fourth respondent), while not responsible for day-to-day management or authoring materials generally, was knowingly concerned in the misrepresentations about accreditation, due to his role as accreditation liaison officer and his knowledge of the facts. The company’s deregistration did not...
Court Disposition
Declaration and findings of fact granted against the third and fourth respondents; no declaration against the second respondent; no injunctions issued; directions made for preparation of orders and further hearing on costs.
Orders
- ['Applicant to prepare short minutes of orders to give effect to the reasons for judgment.' 'Matter to be listed for mention on Wednesday 28 March 2001 at 10.15 am.' "Declarations granted that third and fourth respondents were knowingly concerned in or party to the company's contraventions of the Act as specified."...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment