Rose

The case of *Rose* concerned a dispute between the applicant, Rose, and the respondent, concerning the respondent's alleged contravention of s 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). Rose sought declarations and other relief from the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the respondent had engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct, or conduct likely to mislead or deceive, in contravention of s 18 of the ACL. This involved determining whether the representations made by the respondent were of such a nature as to be likely to mislead or deceive a reasonable consumer in the circumstances.

Carew J considered the nature of the representations made by the respondent and the context in which they were communicated. The Court applied the established principles for assessing misleading or deceptive conduct under the ACL, focusing on the likely effect of the conduct on the target audience. The assessment required a consideration of the objective likelihood of the conduct misleading or deceiving, rather than proof of actual deception.

The Court ultimately found that the respondent had contravened s 18 of the ACL and made declarations to that effect.