Energizer Australia Pty Limited v Gillette Australia Pty Limited

In the Federal Court of Australia, Energizer Australia Pty Limited brought an action against Gillette Australia Pty Limited over claims made in two television advertisements for Duracell batteries. Energizer argued that the advertisements falsely represented that Duracell batteries last three times longer than other brands, including Energizer's own Advanced Formula batteries, and were more powerful. The case hinged on whether the advertisements conveyed misleading or deceptive messages to consumers about the longevity and power of Duracell batteries.

The primary legal issue was whether the advertisements made by Gillette were misleading or deceptive under the Australian Consumer Law. Energizer contended that the advertisements implied a comparison that was not substantiated by the evidence, specifically that Duracell batteries last three times longer than other brands. Gillette argued that the advertisements were merely puffery and not actionable as misleading or deceptive conduct.

The court found that the advertisements did convey misleading information to consumers. The evidence showed that the advertisements led a significant portion of viewers to believe that Duracell batteries last three times longer than other brands, which was not supported by the internal testing conducted by Energizer. The court also noted that the advertisements created a comparative implication that was not substantiated, leading to potential consumer deception. As a result, the court granted an injunction preventing Gillette from broadcasting the advertisements and allowed for further proceedings regarding costs and damages.

The court's orders included a permanent injunction against the broadcast of the first advertisement, known as the "Bunny" advertisement, and provided liberty for either party to apply for costs at various stages of the proceedings.