My Doctor Online Pty Ltd v MIMS Data Systems Pty Ltd

My Doctor Online Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought an interlocutory injunction against MIMS Data Systems Pty Ltd (the respondent) to restrain the respondent from continuing to publish certain information concerning the applicant's services. The dispute concerned the alleged misleading and deceptive conduct of the respondent in publishing information that suggested the applicant's online medical consultation service was not a legitimate or recognised form of medical practice. The application was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had established a sufficient likelihood of success on the merits of its claim for misleading and deceptive conduct under the *Australian Consumer Law* (ACL), specifically section 18, to warrant the grant of an interlocutory injunction. This required the court to assess whether the respondent's publications were likely to mislead or deceive a significant number of consumers into believing that the applicant's services were not a valid or approved method of medical consultation.

In determining whether to grant the injunction, the court applied the well-established principles for interlocutory relief, requiring the applicant to demonstrate a serious question to be tried and that damages would not be an adequate remedy. The court considered the content of the publications, the context in which they were published, and the likely impact on consumers. The court found that the applicant had not demonstrated a strong enough prima facie case of misleading or deceptive conduct, nor had it established that damages would be an inadequate remedy, particularly given the nature of the alleged harm.

Consequently, the Federal Court of Australia dismissed the application for an interlocutory injunction.