Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Jetstar Airways Pty Limited (No 2)

In the case of Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Jetstar Airways Pty Limited (No 2), the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) alleged that Jetstar Airways had contravened sections 18, 29(1)(i) and 29(1)(m) of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). Specifically, the ACCC claimed that Jetstar had made misleading representations about flight prices on its website and mobile site. The court found Jetstar liable in a previous judgment (Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Jetstar Airways Pty Limited [2015] FCA 1263), and the current proceeding focused on the appropriate remedies. The ACCC sought pecuniary penalties, while Jetstar argued for a lower penalty amount or contended that the contraventions should be treated as a single course of conduct.

The court considered several factors in determining the appropriate penalty, including Jetstar's conduct during the investigation and litigation phases, its compliance program, and the need for deterrence. While Jetstar had cooperated somewhat during the investigation, it did not cooperate during the litigation phase and contested the ACCC's claims. The court also considered Jetstar's compliance program, which was deemed detailed and ongoing but not sufficient to prevent the contraventions in this case. Given these factors, the court determined that Jetstar's conduct warranted a penalty that reflected the seriousness of the contraventions.

The court imposed a total pecuniary penalty of $545,000 on Jetstar, finding that the contraventions warranted a penalty that was significant but not excessively high. The court dismissed the proceeding with no orders as to costs. This decision underscores the importance of accurate and transparent pricing information for consumers and the potential consequences for businesses that fail to comply with the ACL.