Browse public registers

This statement of differences was given to the ACCC on 25 January 2012 by NBN Co in respect to an access agreement entered into by Optus Networks Pty Ltd with NBN Co.

This statement of differences was given to the ACCC on 25 January 2012 by NBN Co in respect to an access agreement entered into by ispONE Pty Ltd with NBN Co.

This statement of differences was given to the ACCC on 25 January 2012 by NBN Co in respect to an access agreement entered into by TransACT Capital Communications Pty Ltd with NBN Co.

Paul Maloney Fashion Agency Pty Ltd is a sales agent that represents designers of fashion handbags, among other goods.  In April 2011 Paul Maloney Fashion Agency attempted to induce an on-line reseller not to sell handbags below the recommended retail prices specified by the handbag designer. Paul Maloney Fashion Agency has acknowledged that its conduct in: - making it known to a client that it may not advertise for sale or sell goods for a price less than a price specified by Paul Maloney, or the designer of the goods; - attempting to induce a client not to advertise for sale or sell goods for a price less than a price specified by Paul Maloney, or the designer of the goods; -using a statement of price that is likely to be understood by a client to be a statement of a specified price below which goods are not to be advertised or sold, and - making it known to agents and suppliers of other designers of fashion goods that resellers are offering for sale goods from those designers at prices less than recommended retail price and advising those agents and suppliers to induce, or attempt to induce, resellers not to advertise or to sell goods from those designers at a price less than the specified price; was likely to contravene section 48 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (the CCA). Paul Maloney Fashion Agency has provided the ACCC with an undertaking under section 87B of the CCA that it will not engage in the conduct; write to its clients to alert them to the undertaking and to implement a CCA compliance program.

Under the Wing Pty Ltd is a sales agent that represents designers of fashion handbags, among other goods.  In April 2011 Under the Wing attempted to induce an on-line reseller not to sell handbags below the recommended retail prices specified by the handbag designer. Under the Wing has acknowledged that its conduct in: - making it known to a client that it may not advertise for sale or sell goods for a price less than a price specified by Under the Wing, or the designer of the goods; - attempting to induce a client not to advertise for sale or sell goods for a price less than a price specified by Under the Wing, or the designer of the goods; -using a statement of price that is likely to be understood by a client to be a statement of a specified price below which goods are not to be advertised or sold, and - making it known to agents and suppliers of other designers of fashion goods that resellers are offering for sale goods from those designers at prices less than recommended retail price and advising those agents and suppliers to induce, or attempt to induce, resellers not to advertise or to sell goods from those designers at a price less than the specified price; was likely to contravene section 48 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (the CCA). Under the Wing has provided the ACCC with an undertaking under section 87B of the CCA that it will not engage in the conduct; write to its clients to alert them to the undertaking and to implement a CCA compliance program.

Australian Workplace Services Pty Ltd (AWS) has provided court enforceable undertakings to the ACCC following an investigation relating to beaches of the Trade Practices Act 1974 and the Australian Consumer Law. AWS admits that it made false or misleading representations in contravention of sections 52, 53(f) and 75AZC(1)(j) of the Trade Pracices ACt 1974 and sections 18, 29(1)(i) and 151(1)(l) of the Australian Consumer Law when in the course of selling or promoting its safety products.  Specifically, by making representations that there was a requirement under the relevent workplace safety laws of the state in which the business was located for the business to maintain information and material of the same nature as those supplied or offered for supply by AWS, when in fact there was no such requirement. The undertaking requries AWS to:

The ACCC accepted court enforceable undertakings from Australian Workplace Services Pty Ltd (AWS) in respect of misrepresentations made to small businesses concerning the need for AWS's products. AWS admitted that its conduct was likely to have breached sections 52, 53(f) and 75AZC(1)(j) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 and sections 18, 29(1)(l) and 151(1)(l) of the Australian Consumer Law. As the director and day to day manager of AWS, Mr John O'Halloran has provided a separate court enforceable undertaking to the ACCC. The undertaking requires Mr O'Halloran  not to make, or be directly or indirectly knowingly concerned in, or party to a corporation making representations to consumers that they are required by state or territory workplace health and safety laws to maintain information and/or materials of the same nature as those supplied or offered for supply by AWS, when this is not the case.

From at least 1 June 2010 to 15 September 2011, Furniture Galore advertised in catalogues and on radio, that certain goods were 'on sale' at reduced prices and that customers could make 'savings' below the usual selling price when that was not always correct, and where Furniture Galore had not sold or genuinely offered those goods at the higher usual selling price for a reasonable period of time prior to make the representations.