SC Johnson & Son Pty Limited v Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited

The matter before the court was a dispute between SC Johnson & Son Pty Limited and Reckitt Benckiser (Australia) Pty Limited regarding the packaging and advertising of household insecticide systems. The central issue was whether the packaging of the New NaturGard Product and the New NaturGard Refill represented that the active ingredients included a plant-based or natural ingredient, which would be misleading. This dispute arose against the backdrop of previous television advertising for products in the same range by Reckitt Benckiser. The court had to determine if these advertisements influenced the consumer's perception of the new products being promoted.

The court considered the nature of the consumer class, which included those purchasing household insecticide products for the first time and those seeking refills. It was established that the level of scrutiny by consumers would vary depending on their engagement with the product and the importance of the information provided. The court found that consumers were not necessarily uncritical purchasers of relatively inexpensive items, particularly when they were making choices between different products within a range. The court further held that the representations on the packaging, coupled with the previous advertising, were misleading and likely to deceive the representative consumer.

Ultimately, the court ruled in favour of SC Johnson & Son Pty Limited, finding that the packaging and advertising by Reckitt Benckiser were misleading. The court ordered that the parties provide an agreed form of orders by a specified date, with a subsequent deadline for submission of draft orders and supporting outlines if an agreement could not be reached.