Coleman v Power & Ors

Coleman (the applicant) brought proceedings against Power and others (the respondents) in the High Court of Australia, alleging that the respondents had contravened section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) by publishing and displaying a poster that was misleading or deceptive. The poster, displayed during a federal election campaign, depicted a man in a police uniform with a caption that allegedly implied that police officers were involved in the sexual abuse of children. The applicant, a police officer, claimed that the poster conveyed a false and damaging imputation about the police force, and by extension, about him as a member of that force.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the conduct of the respondents in publishing and displaying the poster constituted conduct that was misleading or deceptive or was likely to mislead or deceive, within the meaning of section 18 of the ACL. This required the Court to consider the meaning and effect of the poster on a reasonable member of the public, and whether that meaning conveyed a false imputation about police officers and their involvement in child sexual abuse. The Court also had to determine if the applicant had standing to bring the claim, given that the alleged misleading conduct was directed at the public generally and not specifically at him.

Gaudron and Gummow JJ, in their joint judgment, found that the poster was not misleading or deceptive under section 18 of the ACL. They reasoned that a reasonable member of the public, when viewing the poster in the context of an election campaign, would not understand it as asserting that police officers were involved in the sexual abuse of children. Instead, they concluded that the poster was intended as a political statement or criticism, likely aimed at government policy or inaction regarding child sexual abuse, rather than a factual assertion about the conduct of police officers. The judges emphasised that the test for misleading or deceptive conduct requires an objective assessment of the likely effect on the target audience, and in this instance, the audience would not have been led into error by the poster. The application was therefore dismissed.