Parker trading as on Grid Off Grid Solar v Switchee Pty Ltd trading as Australian Solar Quotes (No 2)

The case of Parker trading as On Grid Off Grid Solar v Switchee Pty Ltd trading as Australian Solar Quotes (No 2) involves a dispute between the applicant, Mr Parker, who operates a solar panel installation business, and the respondent, Switchee Pty Ltd, a company that publishes business reviews. Mr Parker alleges that Switchee Pty Ltd published a negative and false review about his business, which has harmed his business and resulted in lost profits. The Federal Court was tasked with determining whether Mr Parker's business was damaged by Switchee Pty Ltd's conduct, and if so, to quantify the damages.

The primary legal issue the court had to address was whether Mr Parker's business suffered damages due to Switchee Pty Ltd's publication of a negative review. Additionally, the court needed to quantify the damages if it was found that such damages existed. The court considered Mr Parker's evidence, including his claim of lost jobs and profit, and the profit and loss statement submitted by him. The court also noted the absence of Switchee Pty Ltd during the proceedings and the impact of the negative review on Mr Parker's business.

In reaching its decision, the court examined the evidence presented by Mr Parker, including his affidavits and profit and loss statement. The court found that Mr Parker's business did suffer damages due to Switchee Pty Ltd's misleading and deceptive conduct. The court assessed the damages based on the reasonable certainty possible under the circumstances, taking into account the degree of probability of the hypothetical situation that Mr Parker's business might have been during the relevant period but for Switchee Pty Ltd's contravening conduct. The court concluded that Mr Parker was entitled to an award of damages in the sum of $15,000.

The court ordered that Switchee Pty Ltd pay Mr Parker the sum of $15,000 for the damages suffered by him due to Switchee Pty Ltd's conduct in contravention of the Australian Consumer Law. The court's decision and the orders made reflect the importance of holding businesses accountable for misleading and deceptive conduct that can harm other businesses.