Attorney-General (Cth) v Huynh & Ors

The Attorney-General (Cth) sought to restrain the respondents, Huynh and others, from continuing to operate a business that allegedly contravened the *Australian Consumer Law* (ACL). The core of the dispute concerned whether the respondents' business practices, which involved offering financial services and products to consumers, constituted misleading or deceptive conduct, or conduct likely to mislead or deceive, in contravention of section 18 of the ACL. The matter came before the High Court of Australia.

The High Court was required to determine whether the respondents' conduct in marketing and providing financial services and products was misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive, within the meaning of section 18 of the ACL. Specifically, the Court had to consider the nature of the representations made by the respondents and whether, viewed objectively, those representations were likely to mislead or deceive the relevant class of consumers.

The Court's reasoning focused on the objective assessment of the conduct in question. It applied the established legal principles for determining contraventions of section 18 of the ACL, which require an examination of the conduct in its totality, considering the circumstances in which it occurred and the likely impact on the target audience. The Court considered the representations made by the respondents in their marketing materials and in their dealings with consumers, and assessed whether these representations were likely to create a false or mistaken impression about the nature, quality, or characteristics of the financial services and products offered. The Court affirmed that the test is objective and does not depend on the subjective intention of the alleged contravener or the actual deception of any particular consumer.