Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Superfone Pty Ltd [2021] FCA 278

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Superfone Pty Ltd [2021] FCA 278

A pecuniary penalty of $300,000 was appropriate, taking into account the seriousness, deliberateness, and scale of Superfone's breaches across multiple statutory provisions, Superfone’s size and capacity, the need for general deterrence, mitigating cooperation and consumer redress, but rejecting the respondent’s argument for a lower penalty and limited redress. Consumer redress orders were made to refund affected consumers and allow contract termination without fee.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment
Outcome
Orders made in favour of the applicant including pecuniary penalty, injunction, consumer redress, corrective publication, and costs.
Legal Topics
['unsolicited Consumer Agreements' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'injunctive Relief' 'consumer Redress Orders' 'corrective Publication']
['commercial and Corporations' 'consumer Protection'] ['unsolicited Consumer Agreements' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'pecuniary Penalties' 'injunctive Relief' 'consumer Redress Orders' 'corrective Publication']

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 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Contravention of ss 18, 29(1)(h), (g), and (m), 76, 77, 78, 79 and 86 of the Australian Consumer Law' 'Appropriate pecuniary penalty for breaches' 'Scope of consumer redress orders under s 239 ACL' 'Principles for injunctive relief' 'Relevance of penalty and compensation under s 227 ACL']

Ratio Decidendi

A pecuniary penalty of $300,000 was appropriate, taking into account the seriousness, deliberateness, and scale of Superfone's breaches across multiple statutory provisions, Superfone’s size and capacity, the need for general deterrence, mitigating cooperation and consumer redress, but rejecting the respondent’s argument for a lower penalty and limited redress. Consumer redress orders were made to refund affected consumers and allow contract termination without fee.

Court Disposition

Orders made in favour of the applicant including pecuniary penalty, injunction, consumer redress, corrective publication, and costs.

Orders

  • ['Leave to file amended originating application.' 'Injunction restraining specified practices for three years.' 'Order to pay a pecuniary penalty of $300,000 within 30 days.' 'Requirement to issue corrective communications to affected consumers (Annexures A, B, C).' 'Order to refund termination fees with interest to...