Home Page | News

NewspaperContract and consumer law news


Contract and consumer law news

The news page is currently being populated; more neews will be added soon.

Links to older news items can be found on my old Wordpress page (last updated 2013!)



Case icon19 September 2018 - Unconscionable conduct: Full Court upholds appeal by Unique College

The Full Federal Court has upheld an appeal by Unique International College Pty Ltd, finding that it did not engage in unconscionable conduct regarding the enrolments of volunerable consumers.

The Federal Court (Justice Perram) had previously found 'Unique had engaged in systemic unconscionable conduct in New South Wales by targeting disadvantaged consumers with offers of free laptops, providing financial incentives to its sales representatives, and hosting sign-up meetings to enrol students.' (ACCC media release, 19 Sept)

Unique did not appeal in relation to the Federal Court's findings that it engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct in relation to five specific consumers.

Case icon19 September 2018 - Unconscionable and misleading conduct: Federal Court finds against training college

The Federal Court found a training college engaged in unconscionable and misleading conduct and made 'false or misleading representations when enrolling consumers into diploma courses:



12 June 2013 - ACCC alleges misleading conduct by Coles

The ACCC has filed a case against Coles alleging (in part) that it misled customers by claiming bread was freshly baked in store.

See ACCC Press Release.  Also plenty of media – for example, Pia Akerman, ‘ACCC files case against Coles over ‘fresh’ bread‘ (The Australian, 12 June 2013)

5 June 2013 - High Court rules in Kakavas

The High Court has today handed down its decision in Kakavas v Crown Melbourne Limited.

The Court considered the application of the equitable doctrine of unconscionable conduct.

This case arose after Kakavas suffered gambling losses of almost $1.5 billion at Crown over a period of approximately 14 months. Kakavas alleged he suffered from a special disability, in the form of a gambling addiction, and that Crown unconscientiously took advantage of that disability. The trial judge rejected Kakavas’ claim, finding there was no relevant special disability. The Court of Appeal unanimously rejected an appeal by Kakavas. Kakavas sought, and was granted, special leave to appeal to the High Court in December 2012.

Today the High Court – in a unanimous judgment – dismissed Kakavas’ appeal.

View High Court decision.

View my Kakavas case page.


Back in time

More to follow