Latest Posts
Did you know in Australia you can legally copy a competitors product?
Section 18 of the ACL does not of itself prevent a competitor from copying the product of a rival. A manufacturer does not contravene s 18 of the ACL merely by copying an existing product, provided that it does not represent that its product is the original. No representation of this kind will be made provided the manufacturer has adopted an adequate branding strategy to identify the product as its own. Thus, the mere copying of another’s product will not of itself mislead consumers, provided that the imitation product is sufficiently differentiated from the original through pricing, branding and branding positioning, promotional strategies and retail supply: Parkdale Custom Built Furniture
Have you been misled by online advertising and now want a refund?  Facebook & Google maybe liable !
Conduct that contravenes s.18 of the Australian Consumer Law's (which prohibit misleading and deceptive conduct) may give rise to a private proceeding commenced by individual consumers who are seeking an award of damages, compensation (s.236) and refunds (s.237).
For instance you have a contract with FARM A to haul their organic tomatoes every year to market, but this year the neighboring farms pesticides affect the crop of FARM A and they lose their organic certification and therefore experience economic losses.FARM A can sue in negligence but can the truck driver?Indeterminacy of liability becomes the issue, meaning FARM B does not know what contracts FARM A has with whom and for how much for there to be a direct liability to the truck driver what is required is knowledge.   Perre v Appand (1999) 198 CLR 180.If however the truck driver had put neighboring properties on notice that they had the contract with FARM A and perhaps offered their trucking
The pitfalls of pursuing an action against a Council
Canterbury Bankstown Council successfully defended a claim by a plaintiff pedestrian who suffered a fall as a result of a crack which formed around a Telstra pit. The plaintiff was unable to establish the risk of harm was not insignificant, and the Court also explored the protections offered to roads authorities under section 45 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) (‘CLA’). In Issue The key issues for determination by the Court were: whether the defendant Council breached its duty of care to the plaintiff by failing to repair a crack in the footpath; and even if negligence was established, did the protections offered by section 45 of the CLA apply? The Background On 27 February 2016,
CASE NOTEOmega Plumbing Pty Ltd v Harbour Radio Pty Ltd t/as 2GB and 2GB 873 [2019] NSWSC 1576, ‘Omega’ This case involved the tort of injurious falsehood with an application for an interlocutory injunction to prevent further publications pending the final hearing on the matter. The Defendants are 2GB radio and Ray Hadley their broadcaster who made a number of representations about the plaintiff’s plumbing business on his radio show and the issue is whether there was a prima facie case that those representations were made maliciously and/or with a reckless indifference to the truth or without belief in the truth of the allegations. With an absence of evidence to support the allegations made
98-year-old grandmother faces deportation to India after living in Australia for 12 years
A grandmother who has lived in Australia for 12 years is facing deportation to India after being denied a visa and told she would be a financial burden on the health system. A 98-year-old woman who has called Australia home for the past 12 years has been threatened with deportation to India, a country where she has no one that she can call her own. Originally from the western Indian state of Goa, Esmeralda Rosario arrived in Australia on a tourist visa in 2007.  She received an indefinite bridging visa a year later after her family applied for her aged-parent visa. But their 12-year-long wait ended in a disappointment in November 2019, when Ms Rosario’s visa application was refused on ground
Victoria Police knew of Lawyer X in 2005 as Former Police Chiefs cross swords
News emerged this week that Victoria Police knew of Lawyer-X as early as 2005,  this claim was not made by some low ranking official but none other than Victoria Police Chief, Simon Overland who claims his predesesor Christine Nixon knew in 2005.Simon Overland APM is the former Chief Executive Officer at the City of Whittlesea and a former Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police in Australia and Christine Nixon APM is an Australian former police officer who was the chief commissioner of Victoria Police from 23 April 2001 to 27 February 2009, being the first female chief commissioner in any Australian state police force.Those that have been following the scandal would remember that during the R
The Tort of Negligent misrepresentation - Where you are owed a duty of care for the advice you rely upon.
This tort of negligent misrepresentation is about when you go and see a professional for advice, where there is a duty of care owed to you and there is negligence when providing that advice that causes you financial loss.   That would provide you a cause of action when the person makes a negligent statement or provides negligent advice which you rely upon to your financial detriment, the key is to show that a duty of care existed to prevent economic loss. Indeterminacy of liabilityIt is important to understand the principle of ‘indeterminacy of liability’ which deals with determining whether duty of care exists as a policy consideration where if it were recognised in some cases it would impo
Tort of injurious falsehood -
The tort of injurious falsehood is sort of like defamation against businesses or Corporations,  as you can not "defame" a Corporation and nor do they have a ready remedy in defamation if you do, it does not mean there is no common law remedey available to them against a person who does make malicious false statements against them. Most typically this tort is available when a business competitor makes false claims about the goods, services or business that is directed to the customers or would be customers of the business but this equally applied against individuals, say in online reviews or social media, where it causes damage to the business or causes customers to go elsewhere.Elements of t
In our rush to develop AI capability in Australia are we ignoring the risks of AI?
Map to the future: Australian Government releases a roadmap for developing AI capability in Australia The global race to lead in AI is underway. The Commonwealth Government has recently contributed to the discussion with the release of Australia's AI Roadmap. It promotes strategies designed to advance Australia's AI capability and realise AI's potential for boosting industry productivity, creating jobs and economic growth, and improving the quality of life for Australians. Key takeouts Interest and investment in AI continues to grow in both the public and private sectors as technology advances and offers innovative solutions to challenging problems. Australia's Artificial Intelligence Roadma
Should you reconsider buying a drone as a gift?  Is the person licenced? Fine is $10,500 if not..
The increasing prevalence of drone technology has resulted in a greater focus on how this technology ought to be regulated.  We’ve set out below a summary of what is currently happening in Australia and around the world.  Drone Recap Drone use in Australia is regulated under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASA Regulations). These Regulations are enforced by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) and regulate the licensing and operation of drone use.  While the CASA Regulations regulate matters such as minimum distances from people and places, prohibited flight areas and time of day licensing, CASA does not have jurisdiction over noise issues (managing complaints about drone
False Representations that cause you loss - The Common Law Tort of Deceit
The common law tort of deceit is committed where someone fraudulently makes a false representation that you rely upon which ultimately causes you loss.The elements of the tort are: The defendant made a false representation to the plaintiff The defendant made the representation fraudulently (in a way that intends to deceive by doing something dishonest) The defendant intended the plaintiff to believe in and rely on the representation The plaintiff did act in reliance on the representation, and The plaintiff suffered damage. (Magill v Magill (2006) 226 CLR 551 [59], [114])
SSL Certificates