Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Seven Network Limited [2007] FCA 1505

Australian Competition & Consumer Commission v Seven Network Limited [2007] FCA 1505

The Seven Licensees, by the conduct of their compere and reporter in the Today Tonight broadcasts, did more than merely report the claims of Ms Boholt and Ms Forster. In context, the programs conveyed unqualified representations that Ms Boholt and Ms Forster were millionaires and had achieved wealth through property investment, and that Ms Forster owned over 60 properties and had purchased over $1,000,000 worth of property with none of her own money. These representations were misleading or deceptive under s 52 of the Act as they were not true. The Seven Licensees could not rely on the s 65A exemption because the publications were made pursuant to an arrangement with the providers of the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Declarations and injunctions granted against second to fifth respondents; application against first respondent dismissed; costs orders made.
Legal Topics
['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'trade Practices Act 1974 (cth)' 'section 52' 'section 65 a Exemptions' 'broadcasting Liability' 'injunctions' 'declaratory Relief']
['consumer Law' 'competition Law' 'media Law'] ['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'trade Practices Act 1974 (cth)' 'section 52' 'section 65 a Exemptions' 'broadcasting Liability' 'injunctions' 'declaratory Relief']

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

Civil / Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether statements made in the broadcast were misleading or deceptive under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)' 'Whether Seven Licensees made, adopted, or endorsed representations about the Wildly Wealthy Women program, Ms Boholt and Ms Forster' 'Whether the exemption under s 65A of the Act applied to the Seven Licensees' 'Whether injunctions or other relief should be granted against Seven Network or the Seven Licensees']

Ratio Decidendi

The Seven Licensees, by the conduct of their compere and reporter in the Today Tonight broadcasts, did more than merely report the claims of Ms Boholt and Ms Forster. In context, the programs conveyed unqualified representations that Ms Boholt and Ms Forster were millionaires and had achieved wealth through property investment, and that Ms Forster owned over 60 properties and had purchased over $1,000,000 worth of property with none of her own money. These representations were misleading or deceptive under s 52 of the Act as they were not true. The Seven Licensees could not rely on the s 65A exemption because the publications were made pursuant to an arrangement with the providers of the...

Court Disposition

Declarations and injunctions granted against second to fifth respondents; application against first respondent dismissed; costs orders made.

Orders

  • ['Permanent injunction against Channel Seven Brisbane Pty Limited, Channel Seven Sydney Pty Limited, Channel Seven Melbourne Pty Limited, and Channel Seven Perth Pty Limited restraining them from making or causing to be made in any form the representations that Ms Boholt owned in excess of 60 properties, Ms Forster...