ARTICLE · 15 SEPTEMBER 2012

D&O: $2 million penalties for energy marketer that misled consumers

Norton Rose Fulbright Australia

Explore more from Norton Rose Fulbright Australia

Energy Watch was ordered to pay penalties for making misleading comparisons in breach of the Australian Consumer Law.

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Katherine Czoch

Charlotte Minogue

Author LinkedIn connections

Introduction

On 13 July 2012 Energy Watch was ordered to pay $1.95 million in penalties for making misleading comparisons in breach of the Australian Consumer Law¹. The former CEO of the company was also fined $65,000 for his role in misleading radio advertisements. In imposing the penalties, the Federal Court found that Energy Watch had "deceived the Australian public in a very serious way." Energy Watch is now in liquidation.

This very recent case reminds us that ensuring the accuracy of the "overall impression" conveyed by advertisements is paramount. In particular, it is essential to:

be clear about what products or services are being compared and the limitations of those comparisons; and

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

How Long Does Unpaid Debt Stay On A Credit Report In Australia?

AustraliaConsumer Protection

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

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Bartier Perry Solicitors

ACCC Takes Amazon AU To The Federal Court Of Australia Alleging Its Annual Amazon Prime Video Subscription Contract Contains Unfair Contract Terms

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Unfair Contract Terms Penalties And The Updated UCT Regime: What Your Business Needs To Know

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Coleman Greig Lawyers

When Systems Decide: Consumer Law Risks In AI‑driven Decisions

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

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

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

Comparative Guide

Gambling Law

Comparative Guide

Product Liability

See more popular content from

Consumer Protection

What Is The 2026 Ban On Credit Card Surcharges?

From 1 October 2026, Visa, Mastercard and eftpos can ban businesses from adding surcharges to card transactions, enforced through merchant agreements.

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Misleading Pricing Under Australian Consumer Law

Misleading pricing occurs when a business creates a false or misleading impression about the true cost of goods or services, even where the advertised price is technically correct. Under the Australian Consumer Law, businesses must ensure consumers can understand the real price they will be required to pay, including any unavoidable fees, charges, surcharges or conditions affecting price.

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Stonegate Legal

ACCC cracks down on misleading consumer guarantees and return rights for faulty goods

Recent cases demonstrate the importance of ensuring that businesses do not mislead consumers. Tips on how to comply with the ACL.

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Holding Redlich

How Long Does Unpaid Debt Stay On A Credit Report In Australia?

Understanding how long unpaid debts remain on Australian credit reports is crucial for managing financial reputation and planning recovery from financial difficulty. This comprehensive guide examines retention periods for defaults, court judgments, bankruptcy information, and other credit listings, while explaining the regulatory framework that governs credit reporting in Australia.

AustraliaConsumer Protection

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

Spamming and the Spam Act

A reminder that there is a Spam Act which sets out rules relating to spam messages as explained here.

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Pointon Partners

How misleading claims about your products could cost you!

The ACCC has made it clear that misleading product descriptions will result in fines and orders for remedial action.

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Clifford Gouldson Lawyers

Product safety and notification under the Australian Consumer Law

If you're part of the supply chain, you'd be used to the current way of handling product safety incidents which is mostly left in the hands of suppliers to manage and investigate.

AustraliaConsumer Protection

Misleading or deceptive conduct

Sometimes a third party who relies on misleading & deceptive conduct may be entitled to damages.

AustraliaConsumer Protection

ACCC Conducts Sweep Of Online Statements For Compliance With Australian Consumer Law

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission ("ACCC") recently announced that it had conducted a sweep of more than 2,000 Australian retail websites that found some businesses...

AustraliaConsumer Protection