Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 22 OCTOBER 2012

ACCC / Hewlett-Packard dispute over consumer warranty rights: a reminder to check ACL compliance

Clayton Utz
Explore more from Clayton Utz

Retailers and manufacturers should ensure that they meet ACL obligations to explain consumer guarantees and warranties.

AustraliaConsumer Protection
Michael Corrigan
Michael Corrigan
Author LinkedIn connections

The ACCC has launched proceedings against Hewlett-Packard Australia Pty Ltd for contraventions of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) for allegedly misrepresenting consumer guarantees and warranties. This latest legal action is a timely reminder to retailers and manufacturers to ensure that they are meeting their obligations under the ACL to explain consumer guarantees and warranties properly.

The ACCC's current major priorities include the new consumer product rights under the ACL and there is a particular current focus on consumer guarantee rights for electronics and other popular consumer goods. Since the ACL began in 2011, there has been a strong push by the ACCC to educate consumers and business about their rights under the ACL; earlier this year, it launched its national campaign "If it's not right, use your rights. Repair, replace, refund".

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

When “Down Down” Wasn’t Really Down - Federal Court Rules Against Coles

In its judgement delivered on 14 May 2026, the Federal Court has found that Coles engaged in misleading conduct in relation to its long-running “Down Down” promotion, accepting the ACCC’s case that many advertised discounts were not genuine. The Court held that 13 of the 14 sample “Down Down” tickets examined in the hearing conveyed false or misleading price discount representations because the stated “was” price had not applied for a reasonable period before the promotion.
AustraliaConsumer Protection
Bartier Perry Solicitors
Bartier Perry Solicitors
Article

The Scope Of A School’s Duty Of Care Revisited

An 11-year-old student suffered a back injury during a long jump trial at a school athletics carnival, leading to a significant Court of Appeal decision that clarifies schools' duty of care obligations. The case examines whether basic safety measures like adequate sand depth and regular pit maintenance constitute reasonable precautions that schools must take to protect students during sporting activities.
AustraliaConsumer Protection
Carroll & O'Dea
Carroll & O'Dea