Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 03 JULY 2015

Avoiding the pitfalls of comparative advertising

Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Corrs Chambers Westgarth
Contributor
Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Corrs Chambers Westgarth is Australia’s leading independent law firm. We provide exceptional legal...

View firm profile
Explore more from Corrs Chambers Westgarth

Businesses which use comparative advertising to get a leg up on competitors should have regard to these simple lessons.

AustraliaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment

Businesses which regularly use comparative advertising to get a leg up on their competitors and who want to avoid being hauled in front of the Federal Court for falling foul of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA) would do well to have regard to the simple lessons that can be learned from the Federal Court decision of Samsung Electronics Australia Pty Limited v LG Electronics Australia Pty Limited1 (Samsung v LG).

In Samsung v LG, Nicholas J was required to consider whether certain representations made by LG were misleading or deceptive or false or misleading in contravention of sections 18 and 29(1)(a) of Schedule 2 to the CCA, the Australian Consumer Law (ACL).

The representations that were the subject of the proceedings were made to members of the Australian public in respect of LG's Cinema 3D television.

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.

See more popular content from