Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 28 AUGUST 2015

Am I liable for misleading information supplied by someone else?

Swaab Attorneys
Explore more from Swaab Attorneys

If you or your business disseminate information provided by others, the information could be incorrect or misleading.

AustraliaConsumer Protection
Swaab Author
Swaab Author
Swaab Author
Swaab Author
Author LinkedIn connections

IN BRIEF

The Australian Consumer Law prohibits misleading or deceptive conduct and false or misleading representations. But can you escape liability if you merely pass on misleading information provided by someone else?

THE CONDUIT PRINCIPLE

Generally, an intermediary that innocently passes on misinformation may not be held liable for misleading or deceptive conduct. If the circumstances make it apparent that a corporation is not the source of the information, and that it expressly or impliedly disclaims any belief in the truth or falsity of the information, the corporation does not itself engage in misleading or deceptive conduct.

The High Court has held that a company has not made a misrepresentation if it innocently carries false information in circumstances where it is, and is seen to be, a mere conduit.

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

View source

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
Article

Employ­ers Ban­ning AI Smart Glass­es From The Workplace

As wearable AI technology becomes more prevalent, employers face critical decisions about whether to ban smart glasses in the workplace. This analysis explores the privacy, cybersecurity, and workplace surveillance risks associated with AI-enabled eyewear, while examining the legal framework for regulating their use. Two important exceptions—disability accommodations and workplace safety—complicate what might otherwise be a straightforward prohibition.
AustraliaEmployment and HR
Swaab Attorneys
Swaab Attorneys
Article

Land­lords Beware: New Tobac­co Laws Could Mean Heavy Fines and Even Gaol Time

New South Wales has introduced strict legislation targeting landlords who knowingly permit tenants to sell illicit tobacco and vapes from their premises. With penalties reaching $165,000 and potential imprisonment, property owners must now actively monitor tenant activities and report suspicious behavior. The legislation also grants landlords new powers to terminate leases when closure orders are issued, fundamentally changing the landlord-tenant relationship in commercial retail settings.
AustraliaReal Estate and Construction
Swaab Attorneys
Swaab Attorneys
Article

Per­son­al Lia­bil­i­ty For Build­ing Defects: The Scope Of Sec­tion 37 Of The Design And Build­ing Prac­ti­tion­ers Act 2020 (NSW)

The NSW Supreme Court's decision in Alta Vale Residential Pty Ltd v STM123 Pty Ltd confirms that directors and project managers can face personal liability under section 37 of the Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 for breaching statutory duties of care in construction projects. This case examines how individuals who supervise, coordinate or exercise substantive control over building work may be held personally responsible for economic losses arising from construction defects, even when acting
AustraliaReal Estate and Construction
Swaab Attorneys
Swaab Attorneys
Article

When Is Entry Into A Lot With­out The Lot Own­er’s Con­sent Per­mit­ted To Car­ry Out Repair Work To Com­mon Prop­er­ty? When There Is An Emergency

A New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal case examines when an owners corporation can lawfully enter a lot without owner consent to repair common property under emergency provisions. The dispute centered on whether ongoing water leakage constituted an emergency justifying entry, and what damages flow from such access.
AustraliaReal Estate and Construction
Swaab Attorneys
Swaab Attorneys
Article

Decen­ni­al Insur­ance For New Apart­ment buildings

The New South Wales Government has introduced Decennial Liability Insurance (DLI), a groundbreaking 10-year no-fault insurance policy for new apartment buildings that guarantees protection against serious defects even if developers or builders become insolvent. This legislative reform, passed through the Fair Trading and Building Legislation Amendment Bill 2026, fundamentally changes how apartment owners are protected from structural failures and serious defects.
AustraliaReal Estate and Construction
Swaab Attorneys
Swaab Attorneys