52 results, showing 41 to 52
On 9 April 2012, the ACCC accepted a court enforceable undertaking pursuant to section 87B of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (the Act) (the Undertaking) from FOXTEL Management Pty Limited (FOXTEL) in relation to its proposed acquisition of AUSTAR United Communications Limited (AUSTAR) (the Proposed Acquisition).
The ACCC considered that in the absence of the Undertaking, the Proposed Acquisition would have the effect or be likely to have the effect of substantially lessening competition in the national market for the retail supply of subscription television services and a number of regional markets for the supply of fixed broadband and fixed telephony products.
The ACCC has accepted undertakings under section 87B from Noonkanbah Enterprise Management Company Pty Ltd (NEMCO), the operator of the Yungngora Community Store at Noonkanbah station in the Kimberley region of Western Australia. The ACCC had concerns that NEMCO engaged in false and misleading conduct in contravention of sections 18, 29(1)(a) and 29(1)(i) of the Australian Consumer Law (contained in Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010), by:
selling some products well beyond "best before" dates; and
displaying shelf prices that were lower than the actual purchase prices.
The ACCC has accepted a section 87B undertaking from Telstra Corporation Limited and NBN Co Limited (the parties) in relation to proposed variations pursuant to the substantial adverse events clause in the commercial arrangements between the parties (the Definitive Agreements).
The ACCC has accepted a section 87B Undertaking from Edwards Essences Pty Ltd ACN 137 624 241 in respect of resale price maintenance conduct contravening section 48 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010.
In response to an ACCC investigation, Edwards acknowledged that it had made known to a distributor that it should not sell goods supplied to it by Edwards at a price less than the recommended retail price specified by Edwards.
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.
No results found
No results found