Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 MARCH 2013

Google wins against ACCC

Kott Gunning
Explore more from Kott Gunning

The High Court overturned a decision that Google, via AdWords, was conveying misleading and deceptive representations.

AustraliaConsumer Protection
Josephine Hart (Previously With Kott Gunning)
Josephine Hart (Previously With Kott Gunning)
Author LinkedIn connections

In Google Inc v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2013] HCA 1 (6 February 2013) the High Court overturned a decision from the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia that Google was conveying misleading and deceptive representations in contravention of section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1.

The Facts

The ACCC claimed that particular search results displayed by Google amounted to misleading or deceptive conduct, thereby contravening section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974. The Google search engine responds to users' search requests by keeping an index of billions of accessible web pages, divided into two categories. When a user 'searches' a search term, Google displays two types of search results: the 'organic results' and the 'sponsored links'.

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