← All Authorities
Australia misleading conductdeterrence

ACCC v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Ltd [2016] FCAFC 181; (2016) 340 ALR 25
JurisdictionAustralia
CourtFull Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Year2016
StatusBinding authority

Key Principle

Marketing different products as targeting specific types of pain when each contains the identical active ingredient and is no more effective for the named pain is misleading or deceptive conduct under the Australian Consumer Law, and a civil penalty must be set high enough to deter and not be a mere cost of doing business; the Full Court increased the Nurofen Specific Pain penalty from $1.7 million to $6 million.

Area of Law

consumer

Related Cases

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Google LLC (No 2) Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Google LLC (No 2) [2021] FCA 367; (2021) 391 ALR 346
Australian Securities and Investments Commission v Kobelt (2019) 267 CLR 1
ACCC v Valve Corporation (No 3) [2016] FCA 196

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...