The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission today successfully applied for an interlocutory injunction against Australian Business Reports Pty Ltd and Gary John Solah preventing them from promoting by mail the supply of 'business registers' in breach of the Trade Practices Act.
Before Justice Finn in the Federal Court, Canberra the ACCC had argued that the respondents were making misleading and deceptive representations to many small businesses. The representations included: that the 'register' was either a government agency, or in some way associated with a government; and that the businesses were required to use the register in order to meet government regulatory requirements.
Justice Finn ordered that the respondents be prevented from supplying or offering to supply or promoting any register through representations that: the register is provided by, or affiliated with, a government office when it is not; registration with the register is required by law when it is not; and the register will be recognised by particular persons when there are no reasonable grounds for such a claim,
Justice Finn also ordered that the respondents not make representations that they had a presence at offices where there was no such presence.
A directions hearing will be held in Canberra on 28 February 1997. A full hearing is expected in June. The ACCC is seeking other orders including refunds of administration fees or monies received, corrective advertising and letters to clients advising them of the correct nature of the service provided and including an offer of a refund.
This action follows similar proceedings instituted by the ACCC earlier this year against the promoters of various 'registers' or 'consultancies'.
Before Justice Finn in the Federal Court, Canberra the ACCC had argued that the respondents were making misleading and deceptive representations to many small businesses. The representations included: that the 'register' was either a government agency, or in some way associated with a government; and that the businesses were required to use the register in order to meet government regulatory requirements.
Justice Finn ordered that the respondents be prevented from supplying or offering to supply or promoting any register through representations that: the register is provided by, or affiliated with, a government office when it is not; registration with the register is required by law when it is not; and the register will be recognised by particular persons when there are no reasonable grounds for such a claim,
Justice Finn also ordered that the respondents not make representations that they had a presence at offices where there was no such presence.
A directions hearing will be held in Canberra on 28 February 1997. A full hearing is expected in June. The ACCC is seeking other orders including refunds of administration fees or monies received, corrective advertising and letters to clients advising them of the correct nature of the service provided and including an offer of a refund.
This action follows similar proceedings instituted by the ACCC earlier this year against the promoters of various 'registers' or 'consultancies'.