No special disadvantage required for a finding of unconscionable conduct under section 21 of the ACL

15 Apr 2021

The decision of ACCC v Quantum Housing Group [2021] FCAFC 40 broadened where unconscionable conduct under section 21 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), can be found to have occurred, by saying that the party being acted against does not have to demonstrate a special disadvantage to obtain relief from the conduct.

Recognition of Two MST Lawyers Principals in 2022 edition of Best Lawyers™ in Australia

MST Lawyers is delighted to announce that two Principals in our firm, Alicia Hill and Raynia Theodore, have been recognised in the 2022 edition of Best Lawyers™ in Australia.

Domain Names at Risk for Both Franchisors and Offshore Entities

By Devin Elliott, Law Graduate 1 – The New Rules Impacting Offshore Entities Under the old rules, offshore entities with no Australian connection could register any domain name in the and name spaces, provided they held or applied for an Australian trade mark registration. For example, the owner of the registered trade mark…

When is an agreement a franchise agreement? – Freedom Foods Pty Ltd v Blue Diamond Growers

In Freedom Foods Pty Ltd v Blue Diamond Growers [2021] FCA 172, the Federal Court of Australia was asked to ascertain if an agreement could be classified as “franchise agreement” and thus avoid the application of an arbitration dispute resolution clause and if a matter concerning Australian Law, namely claims of misleading and deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct, was suitable to be heard through an arbitration in California. This case illustrates the importance of understanding your rights in agreements in respect of dispute resolution and whether agreements not identified as relating to franchises can be classified as “franchising agreements”.