Browse public registers

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Brookfield Infrastructure Group (Australia) Pty Ltd and DJP XX LLC pursuant to s 87B of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) in relation to Brookfield’s proposed acquisition of Genesee & Wyoming Inc.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from ZeniMax Media Inc, ZeniMax Europe Limited and ZeniMax Australia Pty Ltd (together, ZeniMax) in relation to misleading representations in relation to the Fallout 76 game about consumers’ statutory rights under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) that were likely to contravene sections 18 and 29(1)(m).

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Bromic Pty Ltd (Bromic) in relation to resale price maintenance conduct that contravened section 48 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (CCA).

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Woolworths Group Ltd trading as BIG W (BIG W). The undertaking is in relation to claims that between at least 30 December 2016 and 30 April 2018, BIG W representatives told consumers who complained about faulty Dyson branded products that they must deal directly with Dyson to obtain a remedy if the complaint was made more than 14 days from the date of purchase.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Target Australia Pty Ltd (Target). The undertaking is in relation to claims that between at least January 2017 and August 2017, Target’s customer service staff told some consumers who complained about faulty Sony PlayStations that they had to contact Sony directly for a remedy and were not entitled to any remedy from Target because the fault had occurred after 30 days from the date of purchase.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Target Australia Pty Ltd (Target). The undertaking is in relation to claims that between at least January 2017 and August 2017, Target’s customer service staff told some consumers who complained about faulty Sony PlayStations that they had to contact Sony directly for a remedy and were not entitled to any remedy from Target because the fault had occurred after 30 days from the date of purchase.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from NBN Co Limited (NBN Co) in relation to its conduct in supplying wholesale business grade services and related activities. The ACCC is satisfied that NBN Co has engaged in conduct that contravened its non-discrimination obligations under 152AXD of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) (CCA).

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable Undertaking from BVivid Pty Ltd (BVivid) in relation to:

On 22 August 2019, the ACCC announced it had accepted an undertaking (the Undertaking) given by Nutrien Ltd and its subsidiary Agrium SP Holdings Pty Limited pursuant to s 87B of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) in connection with Nurtrien's proposal to acquire (through it's Australian business Landmark) all issued shares of Ruralco Holdings Limited (the Proposed Acquisition).

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Saipol Technologies Pty Ltd (ACN 159 655 651) (Saipol) in relation to claims it has made about its ‘C grade’ replacement water filter cartridges. The ACCC considers that the claims were likely to be false, misleading or deceptive in contravention of sections 18 and 29(1)(a) of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). Saipol carries on a business in Australia as an importer, seller and specialist manufacturer of replacement water filtration products, including water filter cartridges. It mainly markets to other businesses including hospitals and universities.

Mitolo Group Pty Ltd (Mitolo) and Maranello Trading Pty Ltd (Maranello) have undertaken that they will not, for a period of 3 years from the commencement of the undertaking, enter into, or offer to enter into, any standard form contract where the contract does not expressly specify a price for the supply under the contract which exceeds $300,000, or where the contract has a duration of more that 12 months, $1 million, with a grower of commercial ware potatoes for the supply of commercial ware potatoes on terms which are less favourable overall than those set out in the template agreement at Annexure “A” to the undertaking.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Big Warehouse Pty Ltd (Big Warehouse) in relation to claims about the availability of spare parts for electrical appliances manufactured by third parties (Spare Parts), the suitability of Spare Parts and consumers’ rights to a full refund or replacement.

On 25 July 2019, the ACCC announced it had accepted an undertaking (the Undertaking) from AP Eagers pursuant to s 87B of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) in connection with AP Eagers proposal to acquire all of the ordinary shares in Automotive Holdings Group Limited (AHG) that it does not already own (the Proposed Acquisition). The Proposed Acquisition was granted authorisation by the ACCC subject to a condition that AP Eagers divest its new car retailing business in the Newcastle / Hunter Valley region to an ACCC approved purchaser.

Vodafone Hutchison Australia Pty Limited ACN 096 304 620 (Vodafone) has offered and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (pursuant to a delegation from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC)) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking in relation to its third party billing service known as “Direct Carrier Billing” (DCB).

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Dodo Services Pty Ltd (Dodo) in relation to claims about its retail broadband plans supplied over the National Broadband Network (NBN) being ‘perfect for streaming’ that were likely to contravene sections 18, 29(1)(b), 29(1)(g) and 34 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). Dodo is a supplier of retail fixed-line broadband plans to consumers supplied over the NBN, in addition to other services. 

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Jetstar Airways Pty Ltd (Jetstar). In December 2018, the ACCC also instituted proceedings against Jetstar in the Federal Court of Australia, alleging that Jetstar had made certain false and misleading representations to consumers about the nature and potential application of their consumer guarantee rights, including about the remedies that consumers may be entitled to in the event of flight delays or cancellations.

On 6 December 2013 ACCC accepted a section 87B Undertaking from Coles Group Limited (ACN 004 089 936) (Coles Group), Coles Supermarkets Australia Pty Ltd (ACN 004 189 708) (Coles Supermarkets), and Eureka Operations Pty Ltd (ACN 104 811 216) (Eureka) (together Coles).

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Hutchison Ports Australia Pty Limited (Hutchison).

On 28 March 2019, the ACCC accepted an undertaking from Gebr. Knauf KG, Knauf Gypsum (Australia) Pty Ltd, Knauf Insulation Pty Ltd, and KnaufAMF Australia Pty Ltd pursuant to s 87B of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) in connection with Gebr. Knauf KG's proposed acquisitions of USG Corporation and Armstrong World Industries Pty Ltd.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has accepted a court enforceable undertaking from Pandora Jewelry Pty Ltd (Pandora) in relation to claims that: 1. Pandora staff made statements to consumers to the effect that Pandora does not provide refunds and Pandora’s Warranty Against Defects overrides the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) consumer guarantees provisions; and 2. Pandora’s online store website failed to adequately inform consumers as to their rights as required by section 102 of the ACL and regulation 90 of the Competition and Consumer Regulations 2010 (Cth) (CCR).