Eva, Geoffrey John v Mazda Motors (Sales) Pty Ltd

In this case, the informant, Geoffrey John Eva, brought proceedings against Mazda Motors (Sales) Pty Ltd in the Federal Court of Australia, alleging that the defendant had contravened section 53(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974. The defendant was accused of falsely advertising that certain Mazda car models had accessories they did not possess. The legal issues for the court to decide were whether the defendant had indeed made false representations about the Mazda cars in their advertisements and, if so, whether these constituted a contravention of section 53(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974.

The court found that the defendant had indeed made false representations about the Mazda cars in their advertisements. The court considered that the advertisements implied that all Mazda sedans had servo-assisted disc brakes, which was not true for all models. The court found that the defendant had not exercised due diligence in verifying the accuracy of the advertisements before their publication. The court further found that the defendant's defence of reliance on information supplied by an advertising agency was not a valid defence under section 53(c) of the Trade Practices Act 1974.

The court imposed penalties on the defendant for each of the seven charges brought against it. The penalties ranged from $2,000 to $4,000, with the total penalty amounting to $20,000. The court also ordered the defendant to pay the informant's costs of the proceedings. The court considered that the penalties imposed should reflect the gravity of the offence and serve as a deterrent to the defendant and other companies from engaging in similar conduct in the future.