Arlington Nominees Pty Ltd v Down Under Exhausts Pty Ltd

Arlington Nominees Pty Ltd brought an application against Down Under Exhausts Pty Ltd in the Federal Court of Australia, seeking an interlocutory injunction to prevent the respondent from engaging in comparative advertising that the applicant claimed was misleading or deceptive. The applicant alleged that the respondent's advertising compared the cost of their exhaust systems unfavourably to the applicant's systems without accurately disclosing the differences in the products or including all costs, such as fitting and extras, in their prices.

The court had to determine whether there was a serious question to be tried regarding the misleading or deceptive nature of the respondent's advertising and whether the balance of convenience favoured granting the injunction. The court considered the obligation of the respondent to ensure the accuracy of their advertising and the potential harm to the applicant's reputation and business if the misleading advertising continued.

In its reasoning, the court found that there was a serious question to be tried regarding the misleading nature of the respondent's advertising, and the balance of convenience favoured the applicant. The court granted an injunction restraining the respondent from publishing comparative statements that did not accurately state the cost of the applicant's products and any differences between the products, including whether fitting or extras were included in the prices. The court also reserved the costs of the hearing for later determination.