Australia deceitanti competitive agreements

ACCC v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd

(2016) 340 ALR 25

JurisdictionAustralia

CourtFull Federal Court of Australia

Year2016

StatusBinding authority

Summary

FCAFC upheld that marketing identical ibuprofen products as targeting specific pain types was a misleading representation under the Australian Consumer Law.

Key Principle

The FCAFC upheld findings that Nurofen's 'targeted' pain relief products were misleading under the ACL where all products contained the same active ingredient; the representation that different products targeted different types of pain was false.

Area of Law

consumer

Related Cases

Google LLC v ACCC (2021) 391 ALR 346

Google was not liable for misleading or deceptive conduct under Australian consumer law in respect of sponsored search results created and placed by third-party advertisers.

Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Kobelt (2019) 267 CLR 1

HCA held 4:3 that a book-up system with Indigenous customers was not unconscionable under ASIC Act s.12CB; unconscionability requires more than a poor bargain.

ACCC v Valve Corporation (No 3) [2016] FCA 196

Valve Corporation made false representations to Australian consumers that no refund rights existed for Steam game purchases, breaching consumer guarantee provisions of the ACL.

Ask CommonBench about this case

Get a detailed analysis of ACCC v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd and how it applies to your situation.

Explain ACCC v Reckitt Benckiser (Aust...