Question:
<citphrase id="cp0.0">cited from="[2008] FCA 476">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.1">cited from="[2008] FCA 476">misleading and deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.2">cited from="[2008] FCA 476">dual pricing</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.3">cited from="[2008] FCA 476">distribution and publication of jewellery catalogues</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.4">cited from="[2008] FCA 476">final orders</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.5">cited from="[2008] FCA 476">terms of declaratory orders</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.6">cited from="[2008] FCA 476">whether injunctive relief is appropriate in the circumstances</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.7">cited from="[2008] FCA 476">whether an order for corrective advertising should be made</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.8">cited from="[2008] FCA 476">costs in the proceedings where applicant fails on significant point</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.0">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.1">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">product safety</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.2">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">prescribed safety standard</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.3">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">vehicle jacks</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.4">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">standard prepared by standards body and proclaimed by gazettal</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.5">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">standard required 'warning: do not get under a vehicle that is supported only by a jack: use vehicle support stands', or words to the same effect, to be marked on jack and similar warning in written instructions</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.6">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">whether 'warning: do not get bodily under a vehicle that is supported by a jack' amounted to words to the same effect</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.7">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">vehicle not suitable for use of vehicle support stands unless raised by a trolley jack</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.8">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">whether prescribed warning ambiguous or absurd</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.9">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">whether prescribed safety standard invalid</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.10">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">whether standard required to satisfy test of being reasonably necessary to prevent or reduce risk of injury</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.11">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">form of orders</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp3.12">cited from="[2004] FCAFC 167">whether declaration, prohibitory injunction, audit of trade practices compliance program, recall of products and advertising were appropriate orders</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.0">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.1">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">advertising of rental appliances</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.2">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">misleading or deceptive conduct in advertising</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.3">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">failure to adequately disclose terms and conditions of rental contracts</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.4">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">proposed consent orders</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.5">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">whether within power or appropriate</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.6">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">whether contravention of s 53c</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.7">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">advertisements for rental of home appliances</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.8">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">statements of periodic rent</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.9">cited from="[2004] FCA 157">whether advertisements required to disclose total rental for period.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp14.0">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp14.1">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">consumer protection</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp14.2">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">misleading or deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp14.3">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">whether advertisement for health insurance was misleading or deceptive</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp14.4">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">use of the words "no excess to pay"</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp15.0">cited from="[1994] FCA 1562">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp15.1">cited from="[1994] FCA 1562">consumer protection</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp15.2">cited from="[1994] FCA 1562">whether label contained misleading or deceptive representations as to the country of origin of the goods</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp15.3">cited from="[1994] FCA 1562">meaning of "made in australia"</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp15.4">cited from="[1994] FCA 1562">meaning of "component"</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp15.5">cited from="[1994] FCA 1562">importance of relative size of representations appearing on the label</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp15.6">cited from="[1994] FCA 1562">consideration of substantial transformation test under customs legislation.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp16.0">cited from="[1992] FCA 474">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp16.1">cited from="[1992] FCA 474">penalties under part iv of the trade practices act 1974 (cth) ("the act ")</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp16.2">cited from="[1992] FCA 474">statutory injunctions</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp16.3">cited from="[1992] FCA 474">construction of s. 80 of the act</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp16.4">cited from="[1992] FCA 474">appropriateness and form of a permanent injunction.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.0">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.1">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">misleading or deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.2">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">whether publication of statements including statements of opinions made in ordinary course of publication of news (not being advertising material) can constitute misleading or deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.3">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">publication of material constituting conduct for purposes of sub-s. 52(1) of the trade practices act 1974</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.4">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">publication of incorrect information constituting misleading or deceptive conduct only if conduct contains or conveys a misrepresentation</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.5">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">some articles of news more readily to be taken as statements by newspaper than others</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.6">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">disadvantages of stated case procedure.  trade practices act 1974 , ss. 4(2) , 80 , 52 (1), 53 (e), 82 , 84 85 (3), 87  federal court of australia act 1976 , sub-s. 25(6)  trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.7">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">misleading or deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.8">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">publication of statements including statements of opinion in ordinary course of publication of newspaper</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.9">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">whether misleading or deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.10">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">whether statements convey misrepresentation</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp17.11">cited from="[1984] FCA 180">trade practices act 1974 (cth), s. 4(2). held: (1) publication of statements, including statements of opinion, made in the ordinary course of the publication of a newspaper can constitute misleading and deceptive conduct within the trade practices act 1974 (cth), s. 52. there is no definable boundary between conduct which is misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive and material which is defamatory; defamatory material does not fall outside the operation of s. 52(1) merely by reason of its being defamatory.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp18.0">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp18.1">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">consumer protection</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp18.2">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">misleading or deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp18.3">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">conduct likely to mislead or deceive</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp18.4">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">selling goods virtually identical to goods manufactured by another</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp18.5">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">goods tagged with manufacturer's label</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp18.6">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">trade practices act 1974 (cth), s. 52(1)*.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp19.0">cited from="[1982] FCA 136">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp19.1">cited from="[1982] FCA 136">conduct likely to mislead or deceive to whether conducting restaurant under a name similar to that of another restaurant was such conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp19.2">cited from="[1982] FCA 136">whether reputation in another country is relevant.  passing-off.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp20.0">citing from="[2009] FCA 1305">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp20.1">citing from="[2009] FCA 1305">false and misleading conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp20.2">citing from="[2009] FCA 1305">false representation about standard</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp20.3">citing from="[2009] FCA 1305">whether a representation is likely to mislead or deceive</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp20.4">citing from="[2009] FCA 1305">representation that a product was recommended no 1 when where was no objective support for the representation</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp20.5">citing from="[2009] FCA 1305">whether the representation should be treated as having no content</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp20.6">citing from="[2009] FCA 1305">whether there was a sufficiently well-founded basis for an apprehension that further contravening conduct might occur if injunctive relief was not granted.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.0">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">contracts [134]</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.1">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">general contractual principles</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.2">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">discharge, breach and defences to action for breach</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.3">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">repudiation and non-performance</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.4">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">election and rescission</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.5">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">loss or waiver of right to rescind</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.6">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">party having right to terminate contract or alternative right to insist on performance</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.7">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">general principles of doctrine of election</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.8">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">to constitute election statement or conduct must be unequivocal.evidence [216]</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.9">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">witnesses</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.10">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">cross examination</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.11">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">when permitted and in general</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.12">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">by whom</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.13">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">evidence of witness proposed to be contradicted by adversary</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.14">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">duty to cross examine</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.15">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">when duty arises.trade and commerce [1074]</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.16">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">consumer protection</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.17">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">misleading or deceptive conduct or false representation</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.18">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">particular cases</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.19">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">advertising and related publications</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp21.20">citing from="[2009] NSWSC 899">false impression conveyed by advertisement as whole.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp22.0">citing from="[2009] FCA 433">costs</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp22.1">citing from="[2009] FCA 433">calderbank offer made by respondent</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp22.2">citing from="[2009] FCA 433">applicant's failure to accept offer not unreasonable</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp22.3">citing from="[2009] FCA 433">consideration of circumstances in which offer made, conduct and nature of proceedings and orders sought by applicant</citphrase>
</citphrases>
<citances>
<sentence from="[2009] FCA 1305" id="cs0">Finally, there is the question of how to assess, if necessary, whether a particular representation is "likely" to mislead or deceive a representative member of the relevant class. In Tillmanns Butcheries Pty Ltd v Australasian Meat Industry Employees' Union [1979] FCA 85 ; (1979) 42 FLR 331 ; 27 ALR 367 (at 346-348; 381-382) (" Tillmanns Butcheries ") Deane J rejected the argument that the word "likely" in s 45D of the Act means "probably". Part of his Honour's reasoning was that, used in that sense, it would add little if anything to the task of a court required to assess, on the balance of probabilities, whether conduct "would have" a particular result. That reasoning was accepted as applying to s 52 of the Act in Global Sportsman Pty Ltd v Mirror Newspapers Pty Ltd [1984] FCA 180 ; (1984) 2 FCR 82. There, a Full Court held (at 87) that conduct is likely to mislead or deceive if that is a "real or not remote chance or possibility regardless of whether it is less or more than fifty per cent". The proposition was supported by reference to the judgment of Deane J in Tillmanns Butcheries which had, a short time earlier, been approved by the High Court in Sheen v Fields Pty Ltd (1984) 58 ALJR 93 ; 51 ALR 345 (see also Foxtel Management Pty Ltd v Australian Video Retailers Association Ltd [2004] FCA 1613 ; (2004) 214 ALR 554 at [76] ; Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Harris Scarfe Australia Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 54 (" ACCC v Harris Scarfe ") at [47]). The representations
 </sentence>
<sentence from="[2009] NSWSC 899" id="cs1">54 Recently, in ACCC v Harris Scarfe Australia Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 54 , Mansfield J said at [53]:

 "Where printed advertising is under consideration, it is appropriate to consider not simply the words or images depicted but also their relative emphasis (whether by print size, location, colour or other manner of presentation) to determine whether the asserted representation has been made in its overall context. " </sentence>
<sentence from="[2009] FCA 433" id="cs2">On 5 February 2009, I gave judgment in this matter: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Harris Scarfe Australia Pty Ltd [2009] FCA 54 (the primary judgment). I made certain declaratory and injunctive orders, and reserved for the parties the question of costs. I have now heard submissions on the question of costs. These reasons follow from, and should be read with, the primary judgment. I do not propose to repeat what is said there. </sentence>
</citances>
<legistitles>
<title id="l0">FEDERAL COURT RULES </title>
</legistitles>
</case>


Question:
<citphrase id="cp0.0">cited from="[2006] FCAFC 22">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.1">cited from="[2006] FCAFC 22">whether conduct directed at a defined section of the community is misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp0.2">cited from="[2006] FCAFC 22">drug company promotional material directed to general practitioners</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.0">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.1">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">misleading or deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.2">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">advertising campaign for pain relieving drug</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.3">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">application for interlocutory relief</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.4">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">whether use of quotation from scientific paper is capable of being misleading or deceptive as a half-truth</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.5">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">whether use of the word "everyday" is capable of being misleading or deceptive</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.6">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">whether claims of "equal tolerability" capable of being misleading or deceptive</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.7">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">principles to be applied to comparative advertising   interlocutory injunctions</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.8">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">whether a serious question to be tried</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.9">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">balance of convenience</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.10">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">effect of injunction on momentum of advertising campaign</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.11">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">effect of applicant remaining free to profit from powerful brand name</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.12">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">relevance of public health.   equity</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.13">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">"unclean hands"</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp4.14">cited from="[1995] FCA 1480">whether applicant taking wrongful advantage of its market power for the purpose of increasing its market share.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp5.0">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp5.1">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">consumer protection</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp5.2">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">misleading or deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp5.3">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">whether advertisement for health insurance was misleading or deceptive</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp5.4">cited from="[1995] FCA 1314">use of the words "no excess to pay"</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp6.0">cited from="[1991] FCA 511">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp6.1">cited from="[1991] FCA 511">consumer protection</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp6.2">cited from="[1991] FCA 511">comparative advertising</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp6.3">cited from="[1991] FCA 511">demonstration video for use in promotion to retailers of simpson washing machines</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp6.4">cited from="[1991] FCA 511">whether misleading or deceptive conduct by reason of false comparison between simpson and hoover machines</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp6.5">cited from="[1991] FCA 511">injunctive relief</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp6.6">cited from="[1991] FCA 511">whether order also should be made for corrective advertising.  trade practices act 1974  henjo investments pty ltd v collins marrickville pty limited [1988] fca 40 ; (1988) 79 alr 83  collier constructions pty ltd v foskett pty ltd (1990) 97 alr 460 , affd (1991) atpr (digest) 46-071  duracell australia pty limited v union carbide australia limited (1988) atpr 40-918  stuart alexander and co. (interstate) pty ltd v blenders pty ltd [1981] fca 152 ; (1981) 53 flr 307  narhex australia pty ltd v sunspot products pty limited [1990] fca 232 ; (1990) atpr 41-036  janssen pharmaceutical pty ltd v pfizer pty ltd (1986) atpr 40-654  makita (australia) pty limited v black and decker (australasia) pty limited [1990] fca 166 ; (1990) atpr 41-030</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp7.0">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp7.1">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">consumer protection</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp7.2">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">misleading or deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp7.3">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">conduct likely to mislead or deceive</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp7.4">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">selling goods virtually identical to goods manufactured by another</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp7.5">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">goods tagged with manufacturer's label</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp7.6">cited from="[1982] HCA 44">trade practices act 1974 (cth), s. 52(1)*.</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp8.0">citing from="[2011] FCA 351">trade practices</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp8.1">citing from="[2011] FCA 351">misleading and deceptive conduct</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp8.2">citing from="[2011] FCA 351">comparative advertising</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp8.3">citing from="[2011] FCA 351">whether figurative statements by the use of text, images and colour constituted representations to the effect that the applicants' "easy way" products were inferior to the respondent's "chatime" products</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp8.4">citing from="[2011] FCA 351">relevant principles discussed</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp8.5">citing from="[2011] FCA 351">publications have to be evaluated as a whole</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp8.6">citing from="[2011] FCA 351">alleged representations held to have been made</citphrase>
<citphrase id="cp8.7">citing from="[2011] FCA 351">injunction and corrective advertising ordered</citphrase>
</citphrases>
<citances>
<sentence from="[2011] FCA 351" id="cs0">The applicants submitted that: Alternatively, corrective advertising may be ordered if it might ( Medical Benefits Fund v Cassidy [2003] FCAFC 289 ; (2003) 135 FCR 1 at 22 [54] ; Luxottica v Specsavers (No 2) [2010] FCA 644 at [9] ):

 43.1 alert consumers to the fact of the misleading or deceptive conduct;
 43.2 inform consumers that they might have some remedy provided there is a nexus between the conduct and the order;
 43.3 aid the enforcement of a primary order; or
 43.4 prevent repetition of the conduct.

 Corrective advertising may be ordered so as to address an applicant's "legitimate commercial concern about the impact of the advertisements and the fact that the impact may linger", even where several months have passed since the advertisements ( King Furniture [2007] FCA 1845 at [51] ---[52]). It is relevant to consider the nature and likely effect of the advertisement and of the proposed corrective advertising, the time which has elapsed, and the requirement that the corrective advertising not be disproportionate to the extent of publication of the misleading material ( Hoover (Aust) Pty Ltd [1991] FCA 511 ; (1991) 104 ALR 369 at 377 (Gummow J); Makita (Aust) Pty Ltd [1990] FCA 166 ; (1990) ATPR 41-030 , (1990) 18 IPR 270 at 281 (Wilcox J)). There is no principle that any particular period is appropriate as a point beyond which corrective advertising is not warranted. It is necessary to examine the nature, extent and intensity of the advertising and the media in which it has been released, with a view to deciding whether there could reasonably be any current misapprehension as a result of the advertisements ( Medical Benefits Fund v Cassidy (2003) 135 FCR 1 at 20 [49], quoting ACCC v On Clinic Australia Pty Ltd (1996) 135 IPR 635 at 640 (Tamberlin J)).
 </sentence>
</citances>
<legistitles>
<title id="l0">FEDERAL COURT RULES </title>
</legistitles>
</case>