Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 SEPTEMBER 2004

Are Your Warnings The Ones That The Product Safety Standards Require?

Freehills
Explore more from Freehills

A recent decision concerning an appeal by BMW Australia Ltd (<B>BMW</B>) serves as a powerful reminder there is not much room for deviation where product safety standards are concerned—slight variations to mandated warnings may result in a breach of the Trade Practices Act.

AustraliaConsumer Protection
Eleanor Scacco
Eleanor Scacco

A recent decision concerning an appeal by BMW Australia Ltd (BMW) serves as a powerful reminder there is not much room for deviation where product safety standards are concerned—slight variations to mandated warnings may result in a breach of the Trade Practices Act.

BMW labelled its vehicle jacks with a warning that differed from the wording used in the mandatory standard. The Court found that BMW's warning was not 'to the same effect' as the warning in the mandatory standard (Standard).

What warning did the Standard require?

The relevant Standard requires vehicle jacks to be labelled:

'WARNING: DO NOT GET UNDER A VEHICLE THAT IS SUPPORTED ONLY BY A JACK: USE VEHICLE SUPPORT STANDS.'

The Standard also allowed for words 'to the same effect' to be used.

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