Australian Competition and Consumer Law

Question: Discuss about the Australian Competition and Consumer Law. Answer: Introduction Volkswagen has been one of the leading car manufacturers and suppliers of vehicles not only in Australia but across the world. The car is renowned for manufacturing vehicles that are not only fuel efficient and loved by users but they are also environment-friendly, and this quality helped them to achieve glorious positions in the world across several years. The emission of the cars even after considerable use has been known to be environmental friendly. However, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission in an independent analysis found out that the company is engaged in some misleading conduct that it has been consistently doing over several years and deceiving the consumers as well as the laws and regulations in practice. The probable consumer law breach and the actions of the ACCC shall be analyzed in the subsequent part of the paper. Analysis Under Section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law, it has been stated that it is illegal for any business or company to engage in any conduct that either misleads or deceives or is likely to mislead or deceive any consumer or other business entity in action (Miller, 2011). The law becomes applicable even in those situations when the company did not intend to mislead or deceive the opposite party, but nevertheless, the opponent underwent harm because of the acts of the company (Corones, 2011). Impressions play an important role in determining the behavior of business. Whenever a question is raised regarding the analysis of whether conduct is misleading or deceptive or is expected to defraud or cheat, the most pertinent question that needs to be answered is with respect to the overall impression that is created by the conduct and its falsity or inaccuracy. It can be said that in the matter that is being discussed, though the company did not make any false claims directly to the consumers yet it is obvious that whenever a person decided to buy a car, there are several factors that he considers (Nottage, 2010). Environmental concerns are a major determining factor nowadays, and since Volkswagen claimed that they were selling cars that were eco-friendly, it is to be noted that this might have cast a positive impression in the minds of the people (Miller, 2009). It was established that the cars have specific software installed on them which automatically gives a reduced reading of the nitrogen oxide emissions when they are tested in the laboratories. Though the amount of nitrogen oxide emitted on the roads is much higher, however, whenever the cars are taken to the labs for checking the reduced reading of the emissions shows that they produce the toxic and harmful gasses in much lesser quantities. This has been found out to be a misleading conduct under the Australian Consumer Law. Based on these findings, Volkswagen was brought to the courts by the ACCC. However, the company stated that the consumers are not being deceived in the matter because the allegations brought against them even if true are against the environment and not against the consumers in any way. There was no dilemma over the quality of the cars or their performance, and hence they claimed that they had not made a breach of any law. However, since their impression was not a reasonable one, this has the effect of deceiving the consumers or trying to mislead them for making their purchase (Silberstein, 2003). If the fact was known to them, there could have been many who would have chosen otherwise and selected other options rather than choosing Volkswagen. Moreover, it should also be noted that the people could not have discovered this defect in the cars under ordinary circumstances. Hence, it was the duty of the company and the manufacturers to intimate the people about the same which they failed to do (Singtel Optus Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, [2012]). Thus, it is clear that the company in spite of knowing about the actual scenario concealed those facts from the people and thus tried to deceive them (Harris, 2010). Thus, if proceedings are brought against them, they cannot be said to be against the Australian Consumer Law because the consumers have also been deceived under the act of the company for which they can claim for compensation and seek for damages. References Corones, S. (2011).The Australian consumer law. Rozelle, N.S.W.: Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia. Harris, B. (2010). A Model Australian Consumer Code Relating to Defective Goods.Journal of Politics and Law, 3(2). Miller, R. (2009).Miller's annotated Trade Practices Act. Pyrmont, N.S.W.: Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia. Miller, R. (2011).Miller's Australian Competition and Consumer Law annotated. Pyrmont, N.S.W.: Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia. Nottage, L. (2010). The New Australian Consumer Law: What About Consumer ADR?.QUT Law Review, 9(2). Silberstein, S. (2003).Consumer law in a nutshell. London: Sweet Maxwell. Singtel Optus Pty Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission[2012] FCAFC p.20.