Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v SensaSlim Australia Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 7)

In the Federal Court of Australia, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) brought an action against SensaSlim Australia Pty Ltd (in liquidation), Peter Clarence Foster, Peter Leslie O'Brien, and Michael Anthony Boyle for breaches of consumer protection laws under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). The ACCC alleged that the respondents made false or misleading representations about the involvement of certain individuals in the franchise system, the quality of the weight loss products, and the potential earnings from the franchise. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate pecuniary penalties, disqualification orders, and injunctions against the respondents.

The legal issues before the court included the calculation of appropriate penalties for the respondents, the scope of the Full Court’s decision in Director, Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union regarding civil penalty submissions, and the interpretation of the High Court's judgment in Commonwealth v Director, Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate concerning the acceptance of penalty submissions in civil penalty proceedings. The court also needed to decide on disqualification orders and injunctions against the respondents, ensuring they did not engage in similar misconduct in the future.

The court found that SensaSlim Australia Pty Ltd (in liquidation) was liable for substantial misrepresentations, and it imposed a pecuniary penalty of $3.45 million. Peter Clarence Foster was held accountable for specific misrepresentations and was fined $660,000 and permanently disqualified from managing corporations. Peter Leslie O’Brien was fined $55,000 and disqualified from managing corporations for ten years. Michael Anthony Boyle was fined $75,000 and disqualified for three years. The court also issued injunctions to prevent the respondents from engaging in misleading conduct and required them to pay the ACCC's costs.

The final orders included substantial penalties for the corporate respondent and personal respondents, permanent and temporary disqualifications from managing corporations, and specific injunctions to prevent future misleading conduct. The court further ordered that the reasons for judgment in the earlier proceedings be sealed and retained on the Court file.