Keith George Mackrell v L'Oreal

In the matter of *Keith George Mackrell v L'Oreal*, the applicant, Mr. Mackrell, brought proceedings against the respondent, L'Oreal, alleging contravention of the *Australian Consumer Law* (ACL). The dispute concerned representations made by L'Oreal regarding the efficacy of its hair regrowth product, "Serioxyl". Mr. Mackrell claimed these representations were misleading or deceptive, leading him to purchase the product. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether L'Oreal had contravened section 18 of the ACL, which prohibits conduct that is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive. This required the Court to determine if the representations made by L'Oreal about the product's ability to regrow hair were, in fact, misleading or deceptive, considering the evidence presented regarding the product's actual performance and the scientific basis for the claims.

Justice Edmonds found that L'Oreal had contravened section 18 of the ACL. The Court reasoned that the representations made by L'Oreal, particularly those suggesting the product would "regrow hair," were not substantiated by sufficient scientific evidence. The evidence presented by L'Oreal did not establish that the product was capable of regrowing hair in the manner suggested by the marketing. Consequently, the Court concluded that the representations were likely to mislead consumers into believing the product possessed a capability it did not demonstrably have. The Court ordered that L'Oreal pay Mr. Mackrell's costs.