RB (Hygiene Home) Australia Pty Ltd v Procter & Gamble Australia Pty Limited

RB (Hygiene Home) Australia Pty Ltd sought interim injunctive relief against Procter & Gamble Australia Pty Limited, alleging that the latter had contravened the Australian Consumer Law by making misleading claims about the cleaning efficacy of its "30 Minute Miracle" dishwashing tablet. The applicant argued that the packaging of the product conveyed representations that the product was superior in cleaning a 30-minute dishwasher cycle compared to the applicant's Platinum Plus product. The Federal Court was required to determine whether a prima facie case existed for the grant of interim injunctive relief, and whether the balance of convenience favoured such a grant.

The Court considered the evidence provided by both parties and noted that the dishwashing market was highly competitive and technically complex, with consumers placing significant trust in manufacturers' claims about product performance. The Court found that there was a prima facie case that the representations made by the respondent were misleading, as the evidence showed that the Miracle product did not outperform the Platinum Plus product in a 30-minute cycle as claimed. The Court also determined that the balance of convenience favoured the grant of interim injunctive relief, as the interests of consumers would be best served by preventing the respondent from continuing to make the alleged misleading claims until the matter was finally determined.

The Court granted the interim injunctive relief sought by the applicant, restraining the respondent from representing that its Miracle dishwashing tablet product was better at cleaning in a 30-minute dishwashing cycle than its Platinum Plus product. The Court noted that the applicant had given the usual undertaking as to damages. The costs of the application for interim injunctive relief were to be the applicant’s costs in the cause.