Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Contact Plus; Group Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 2)

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) brought proceedings against Contact Plus; Group Pty Ltd (in liq) for alleged breaches of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. The court had issued Orders following a mediation attended by Mr Spencer, who signed the proposed orders and agreed statement of facts. Despite being aware of the orders and their date of approval, Mr Spencer failed to comply with certain clauses of the orders until after he had received a sealed copy of the orders. Mr Spencer argued that he believed compliance was contingent on receiving the sealed copy of the orders, but the ACCC contended that the time for compliance began on the date the orders were pronounced in court.

The court considered whether Mr Spencer’s delay in complying with the orders constituted contempt. The court needed to decide whether Mr Spencer's actions were a deliberate refusal to comply or an oversight, and whether the delay caused any prejudice to the ACCC. The court examined the evidence provided, including Mr Spencer's affidavits and the timeline of events. It found that Mr Spencer was aware of the orders and their terms, and that his delay in compliance was not due to any lack of understanding or oversight, but rather a deliberate decision to wait until he received the sealed copy. The court concluded that Mr Spencer's actions were a deliberate refusal to comply with the court’s orders, thus constituting contempt.

The court ordered that Mr Spencer be fined $8,000 for contempt. It also mandated that Mr Spencer provide a complete copy of the orders to certain parties by a specified date. The court vacated a clause requiring Mr Spencer to provide a disclosure statement and ordered him to pay the ACCC’s costs of and incidental to the notice of motion on an indemnity basis. This decision highlights the importance of adhering to court-approved orders and the consequences of non-compliance.