136 results, showing 41 to 60
On 18 December 2009, the ACCC accepted the undertaking of Mr. Patrick Lawrence Kearns, a director of Toll Holdings Ltd and/or its related bodies corporate.
Under the undertaking Mr.
On 18 December 2009, the ACCC accepted the undertaking of Mr Barry Clark, a director of Toll Holdings Ltd and/or its related bodies corporate.
Under the undertaking Mr Barry Clark agrees to sell down any interest he has in Asciano Limited and thereafter maintain his independence from Asciano. In addition, Mr Barry Clark must immediately resign from all positions within Toll, and take no further part in the company if he ceases to meet the requisite standards of independence.
The undertaking is associated with the fifth variation, accepted by the ACCC on 18 April 2007, to the undertaking given by Toll to the ACCC on 11 March 2006. The fifth variation relates to Toll’s restructure of its group businesses by way of scheme of arrangement to create a new listed entity and trust, Asciano.
The ACCC's decision to consent to the fifth variation is given effect through the following documents:
a variation to Toll's undertakings;
a new undertaking from Asciano Limited; and
new undertakings from the directors of Toll and Asciano.
A copy of those documents can be viewed on the ACCC’s website.
On 18 December 2009, the ACCC accepted the undertaking of Mr Andrew Lim Kwang Leng, a director of Toll Holdings Ltd and/or its related bodies corporate.
Under the undertaking Mr Andrew Lim Kwang Leng agrees to sell down any interest he has in Asciano Limited and thereafter maintain his independence from Asciano. In addition, Mr Andrew Lim Kwang Leng must immediately resign from all positions within Toll, and take no further part in the company if he ceases to meet the requisite standards of independence.
The undertaking is associated with the fifth variation, accepted by the ACCC on 18 April 2007, to the undertaking given by Toll to the ACCC on 11 March 2006. The fifth variation relates to Toll’s restructure of its group businesses by way of scheme of arrangement to create a new listed entity and trust, Asciano.
The ACCC's decision to consent to the fifth variation is given effect through the following documents:
a variation to Toll's undertakings;
a new undertaking from Asciano Limited; and
new undertakings from the directors of Toll and Asciano.
A copy of those documents can be viewed on the ACCC’s website.
TMJ Pty Ltd (ACN 091 194 124) trading as Premier Blinds & Awnings (Premier Blinds) sells made to measure blinds and awnings in South-East Queensland and Mackay.
Between at least January 2008 and October 2009 Premier Blinds regularly published advertisements in The Sunday Mail newspaper where it advertised products to be “on sale” at discounts of between 25% to 40% off the recommended retail price. Sometimes the same product was “on sale” for over seven months.
Premier Blinds admits that these advertisements did not always accurately represent the actual savings available to customers. Customers were generally not truly saving the discounted amount on some products because:
Premier Blinds continuously advertised some products at a discount, which meant that the products were generally not sold at the higher price before or after each advertised ‘sale’; and
Premier Blinds rarely sold or offered the products for sale at the recommended retail price.
The ACCC has obtained court enforceable Undertakings from seven former directors of Mercy Ministries Incorporated and/or Mercy Ministries Limited in relation to representations made by those entities.
Mercy Ministries is a not-for-profit organisation which offered a residential counselling program to young women affected by issues such as eating disorders, depression, self harm, unplanned pregnancy, and abuse.
The ACCC has obtained court enforceable Undertakings from seven former directors of Mercy Ministries Incorporated and/or Mercy Ministries Limited in relation to representations made by those entities.
Mercy Ministries is a not-for-profit organisation which offered a residential counselling program to young women affected by issues such as eating disorders, depression, self harm, unplanned pregnancy, and abuse.
On 25 November, 2009 the ACCC accepted a request to vary the undertaking provided by Spray Pave Australia Pty Ltd (SPA) on 7 July, 2009. The variation amends the dates on which SPA's advertising first appeared on certain websites.
Yarrabee Investments Pty Ltd (Yarrabee Investments) carries on the business of selling furniture products, including bedding products, through two retail stores in Victoria under the trading names Leather Lounges Direct and Dekabu Leather.
International Beauty Supplies (IBS) carries on the business of importing, distributing, wholesaling and retailing beauty products in Australia.
Yuwah Holdings Pty Ltd (Yuwah) employs all staff involved in the business of IBS and provides administration services to IBS.
IBS supplies goods to 28 distributors across Australia who on-sell IBS goods to professional salons.
In February 2008 IBS:
entered into Distributor Agreements for the supply of goods on standardised terms, one of the terms of which was that the distributor would not sell the goods at a price less than a price specified by IBS as follows:
‘Prices 5(3) - The Buyer will sell the Goods at the Suppliers published wholesale price including GST with the recommended retail price for those businesses detailed in item 3(a) who may sell non-professional Goods to consumers.’
sent a letter to distributors notifying that IBS would not supply goods unless the Distributor Agreement was signed, thereby making it known that IBS would not supply goods to distributors unless they agreed not to sell IBS goods at a price less than a price specified by IBS; and
provided distributors with price lists and catalogues containing a statement of a price that was likely to be understood by distributors as the price below which IBS goods were not to be sold.
IBS admits that in engaging in the conduct described above, it is likely to have contravened section 48 of the Act.
Upon being made aware of the ACCC’s concerns, IBS and Yuwah have offered an Undertaking to the ACCC pursuant to section 87B of the Act that they will not to engage in similar conduct for a period of three years.
International Beauty Supplies has offered an undertaking that it will:
write to its distributors advising them of the ACCC’s concerns and that they are free to determine the prices at which they advertise and sell IBS goods;
vary the Distributor Agreement to delete the ‘Prices’ clause; and
review its existing Trade Practices Compliance Program.
Snooze Management Pty Ltd and Snooze Sleep Well Pty Ltd (‘Snooze’) are the owner and franchisor of 70 Snooze bedding retail stores across Australia.
From 6 October 2008 to 2 November 2008, Snooze ran a national “50 months Interest Free” marketing campaign whereby many products were promoted in its retail stores using comparison pricing in the ‘Was $X Now $Y’ format.
An ACCC audit of Snooze retail stores revealed that a number of the products had not been offered for sale or sold at the ‘Was’ prices for a reasonable period immediately prior to the October campaign.
Snooze admits the ‘Was’ prices were actually a reference to their own internally-set recommended retail prices, rather than the price at which their products were offered for sale or sold for a reasonable period immediately prior to the October campaign.
Snooze therefore admits that their ‘Was/Now’ pricing during their October campaign is likely to have misled or deceived consumers in breach of sections 52 and 53(e) of the Trade Practices Act 1974.
Upon being made aware of the ACCC’s concerns, Snooze have offered an Undertaking to the ACCC pursuant to section 87B of the Act that it will:
not engage in similar conduct;
display in-store corrective notices;
publish an information notice in FB Magazine;
write an apology letter to customers known to have purchased a product promoted in-store by ‘Was/Now’ pricing during their October campaign and will offer them a $50 gift voucher;
establish and implement a trade practices compliance program; and
write a letter to franchisees offering trade practices compliance training.
On 11 November 2009, the ACCC accepted an undertaking from Woolworths Limited and Carboxy Pty Limited (a joint venture between Woolworths and Lowe’s, a US Home Improvement retailer) in relation to the proposed acquisition of Danks Holdings Limited by Carboxy.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has accepted court enforceable undertakings from one of Australia’s largest online department stores, Auction Alliance Pty Ltd trading as Deals Direct (www.DealsDirect.com.au).
Auction Alliance sells a wide variety of goods including kitchen items, furniture, computers, electronics, jewellery, tools, fitness equipment, alcohol, manchester, musical instruments and toys.
The ACCC raised concerns with Auction Alliance that its warranties and returns policy breached the Trade Practices Act 1974 because it contained misleading and false information about consumers’ warranty and refund rights.
The ACCC was concerned about statements to the effect that:
where a good is damaged or faulty the consumer is only entitled to a remedy if they make a claim within 30 days from the date of dispatch by Auction Alliance and no further warranty is available;
the consumer is required to pay any shipping costs incurred in returning the faulty good to Auction Alliance if it is returned after 30 days from the date of original dispatch by Auction Alliance;
the consumer will only be entitled to a refund if a replacement product cannot be provided by Auction Alliance; and
in the case of some products Auction Alliance does not provide any warranty and consumers must deal directly with the supplier or manufacturer.
The ACCC was also concerned about materials, including warranty information, supplied with the ‘Ultimate Pilates Workout Chair’ purchased by consumers from Auction Alliance.
The materials suggested the UPW Chair was manufactured and warranted by Guthy-Renker Australia Pty Ltd when this was not the case.
Auction Alliance has admitted its warranties and returns policy contained false and misleading statements about consumers’ statutory warranty rights.
It has also admitted to misleading consumers about the manufacturer of the UPW Chair.
Auction Alliance has undertaken to amend its warranties and returns policy and place notices on its website and in its daily e-newsletters explaining its conduct.
It has also agreed to consider warranty claims for faulty products purchased since 1 September 2008 where consumers may not have pursued a remedy because of Auction Alliance’s admitted false and misleading statements.
Auction Alliance has also agreed to write to consumers who purchased the UPW Chair offering to either provide a warranty on the same terms as the Guthy-Renker warranty or provide a full refund of the purchase price (including postage).
On 14 October 2009 the ACCC accepted the undertaking of Merck & Co Inc (Merck) and Schering-Plough Corporation (Schering-Plough) in relation to the ACCC’s decision not to oppose Schering-Plough’s proposed acquisition of Merck.
Schering-Plough operates its animal health business in Australia through its subsidiary, Intervet Australia Pty Ltd.
Between about October 2006 and at least 9 April 2009, IGA Distribution Pty Limited represented via the product’s labelling and in its dealings with IGA-branded stores that its corporate brand edible oil labelled “IGA Isabella Extra Virgin Olive Oil” (Isabella) was extra virgin olive oil (Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation).
The ACCC considers that certain batches of Isabella supplied by IGA Distribution prior to 9 April 2009 were not, in fact, extra virgin olive oil and, as such, IGA Distribution is likely to have engaged in false, misleading and deceptive conduct in contravention of sections 52 and 53(a) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 by making the Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation.
IGA Distribution has provided court enforceable undertakings to the ACCC that, for a period of three years, it will:
not, in the course of supplying edible oil, represent that any IGA corporate brand edible oil is extra virgin olive oil when it does not meet certain specified criteria for extra virgin olive oil contained in the International Olive Council’s (IOC) Trade Standard Applying to Olive Oils and Olive-Pomace Oils (IOC Standard); and
require each of its existing and new suppliers of IGA corporate brand extra virgin olive oil to provide IGA Distribution with a test report, issued by a National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA) or IOC accredited laboratory, demonstrating compliance of its product with certain specified criteria for extra virgin olive oil contained in the IOC Standard.
Between April 2007 and April 2008 Dirt Works Australia Pty Limited, a wholesaler of bicycles, supplied to retailers 115 Surly Steamroller bicycles which did not have a back brake and also, in some instances, did not have reflectors and a bell, as required by the mandatory standard for pedal bicycles.
Dirt Works also supplied those bicycles and a further 190 Surly Steamroller bicycles between May 2008 and June 2009 with a manual which did not comply with the mandatory standard and in packaging which did not have printed on it certain information and a warning regarding their assembly as required by the mandatory standard.
Dirt Works acknowledges that by engaging in the above-mentioned conduct it contravened section 65C of the Trade Practices Act 1974.
In response to concerns raised with it by the ACCC regarding its conduct, Dirt Works wrote to its retail customers to whom it supplied the bicycles advising them of the failure of the bicycles to comply with the mandatory standard and requesting that they cease supplying any unsold stock of them until they complied with the mandatory standard.
Dirt Works has provided court enforceable undertakings not to supply any bicycles that the mandatory standard applies to unless they comply with that standard and to implement a Trade Practices Compliance Program.
Dirt Works has also provided court enforceable undertakings which are designed to ensure that consumers who purchased the bicycles:
are made aware that their bicycles failed to comply with the mandatory standard;
are given the opportunity to have their bicycles fitted with a back brake, reflectors and a bell free of charge if they were not supplied with any of those items when they purchased their bicycles; and
are supplied with a manual which complies with the mandatory standard.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has accepted court enforceable undertakings from Australian Loans Management Pty Ltd (ALM) and Active Money (Aust) Pty Ltd (AM).
ALM promoted and sold “licence agreements” for a finance broking business called “Active Money”. ALM stated that these licence agreements were not franchising agreements.
ALM also failed to comply with the Franchising Code of Conduct (the Franchising Code) when entering into existing franchise agreements and when dealing with prospective franchisees.
ALM has admitted that its licence agreement is a franchise agreement and that it did not comply with the Franchising Code.
It also admitted it misled franchisees by stating that the licence agreement was not a franchise agreement which potentially misled franchisees into believing that they were not entitled to the rights and remedies afforded by the Franchising Code.
ALM and AM have undertaken to implement measures to ensure future compliance with the Franchising Code, to provide existing franchisees with a copy of the Franchising Code, a disclosure document and a proposed franchise agreement that complies with the Franchising Code.
ALM and AM will also provide existing franchisees with the opportunity to cancel their existing licence agreement and obtain a full refund of all monies paid to ALM.
Although AM did not engage in the admitted contravening conduct, it also offered an undertaking to the ACCC because ALM advised that going forward it intends for AM to be the franchisor.
On 30 September 2009 the ACCC accepted the undertaking of Pfizer Inc and Pfizer Australia Pty Ltd in relation to the ACCC's decision not to oppose Pfizer Inc's proposed acquisition of Wyeth Corp.
Between about August 2007 and at least 14 May 2009, Calcorp (Australia) Pty Ltd represented via the product’s labelling and in its dealings with its customer Coles that a batch of 500ml units of edible labelled “Paese Mio Organic Extra Virgin Olive Oil” (Paese Mio) was extra virgin olive oil (Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation).
The ACCC considers that Calcorp has engaged in false, misleading and deceptive conduct by making the Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation because the product was not, in fact, extra virgin olive oil.
Calcorp admits that, by making the Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation, it made representations about Paese Mio that were false, misleading and deceptive in contravention of sections 52 and 53(a) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (TPA).
Calcorp’s manager, Mr Antonio Dattilo, admits he was knowingly concerned in, or party to, the making of the Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation because he authorised the Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation and given his knowledge of Calcorp’s products.
Calcorp has provided court enforceable undertakings to the ACCC that, for a period of three years, it will:
not represent that a cooking oil is “extra virgin olive oil”, “virgin olive oil” or “olive oil” when it is not;
prior to supplying a batch of edible oil in Australia labelled “olive oil”, “virgin olive oil” or “extra virgin olive oil –
require the producer or its supplier of the edible oil to provide a certificate of analysis, or equivalent document, demonstrating compliance of a sample from the applicable batch with the International Olive Council’s (IOC) Trade Standard Applying to Olive Oils and Olive-Pomace Oils (IOC Standard) or other equivalent or recognised standard; and
commission a NATA or IOC accredited laboratory within Australia to test a sample from the applicable batch against the IOC Standard or other equivalent or recognised standard; and
implement a Trade Practices Compliance Program.
Mr Dattilo has undertaken to the ACCC that, for a period of three years, he will:
not engage in conduct that constitutes -
a contravention of section 52 and/or 53(a) of the TPA; or
being in any way, directly or indirectly, knowingly concerned in, or party to, the contravention by a person of such a provision;
require documentation from his suppliers demonstrating compliance with the IOC Standard and commission a further test by a NATA or IOC accreand implementdited laboratory prior to supplying edible oil; and
attend practical trade practices training.
Between about March 2007 and at least March 2009, Basfoods (Aust) Pty Ltd represented via the product’s labelling and in its dealings with its customers – who were mostly delicatessens, small food retailers and restaurants – that edible oil labelled “Aigeon Oil 100% Extra Virgin Olive Oil” (Aigeon) was extra virgin olive oil (Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation).
The ACCC considers that Basfoods has engaged in false, misleading and deceptive conduct by making the Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation because the product was not, in fact, extra virgin olive oil.
Basfoods admits that, by making the Extra Virgin Olive Oil Representation, it made representations about Aigeon that were false, misleading and deceptive in contravention of sections 52 and 53(a) of the Trade Practices Act 1974.
Basfoods has provided court enforceable undertakings to the ACCC that, for a period of three years, it will:
not represent that a cooking oil is “extra virgin olive oil”, “virgin olive oil” or “olive oil” when it is not;
prior to supplying a batch of edible oil in Australia labelled “olive oil”, “virgin olive oil” or “extra virgin olive oil –
require the producer or its supplier of the edible oil to provide a certificate of analysis, or equivalent document, demonstrating compliance of a sample from the applicable batch with the International Olive Council’s (IOC) Trade Standard Applying to Olive Oils and Olive-Pomace Oils (IOC Standard) or other equivalent or recognised standard; and
commission a NATA or IOC accredited laboratory within Australia to test a sample from the applicable batch against the IOC Standard or other equivalent or recognised standard;
send a letter to each person Basfoods supplied Aigeon to between March 2007 and April 2009 informing them of Basfoods’ conduct; and
implement a Trade Practices Compliance Program.
On 21 September 2009, the ACCC accepted the undertaking of Dr Robert Edgar, a director of Asciano Ltd and/or its related bodies corporate.
Under the undertaking Dr Edgar agrees to remain an 'Independent Asciano Person'.
A person is not an Independent Asciano Person if, amongst other things, he or she, or his or her relative, has an interest in Toll Holdings Ltd (including shares), is employed by Toll, or has, in the past five years, been a director of or adviser to Toll.
The undertaking is associated with the fifth variation, accepted by the ACCC on 18 April 2007, to the undertaking given by Toll to the ACCC on 11 March 2006.
The fifth variation relates to Toll’s restructure of its group businesses by way of scheme of arrangement to create a new listed entity and trust, Asciano.
The ACCC's decision to consent to the fifth variation was given effect through the following documents:
a variation to Toll's undertakings;
a new undertaking from Asciano Limited; and
new undertakings from the directors of Toll and Asciano.
No results found
No results found