In ACCC v Lifestyle Photographers Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1538 (20 December 2016), the Federal Court has

Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!

Question:

In ACCC v Lifestyle Photographers Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 1538 (20 December 2016), the Federal Court has imposed a fine of $1.1 million on Lifestyle Photographers Pty Ltd (trading as Expression Sessions) for engaging in unconscionable conduct and engaging in “unfair tactics and undue pressure” (with alleged breaches of ss 18, 21, 29(1), 48 the Australian Consumer Law [contained in Sch 2 to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)]) in selling photographic products at its kiosks and pop-up stores in shopping centres around Australia between 2012 and 2014. As a result of the Court's decision, Expression Sessions must write to all customers who entered into a contract between 2012 and 2014 to advise them that they are entitled to receive a refund. Customers who wish to receive a refund will not need to respond to the letter. Background to the Case It is alleged that between 2012 and 2014, Expression Sessions sold photography packages, including baby and child portraits, through kiosks and pop-up stores in shopping centres around Australia. It is also alleged that the company also failed to provide clear and accurate information about contract terms, had unfair contract terms and targeted vulnerable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander consumers, according to the ACCC. The firm used promises of free photographs and other inducements to then pressure customers into signing expensive ongoing contracts, some of which ranged from $2,800 up to $9,900, with payments in some cases coming directly out of consumers’ Centrelink payments. Lifestyle Photographers admitted liability and the parties made joint submissions to the court in relation to penalties and other orders. About the Company In December 2015, Lifestyle Photographers Pty Ltd sold the Expression Sessions business to a related company, Easy Payments Pty Ltd and Lifestyle then entered voluntary administration. The ACCC subsequently joined Easy Payments to the proceedings. The Federal Court made orders against both companies. The ACCC’s Reaction ACCC Deputy Chair Delia Rickard said: “In many cases, Expression Sessions’ customers were Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander or were financially disadvantaged … Pressuring vulnerable or disadvantaged consumers into buying products they cannot afford is clearly unacceptable. Businesses have a responsibility to be upfront with consumers and clearly explain the total price of the goods and services they are offering. The ACCC will continue to prioritise consumer protection issues impacting on vulnerable and disadvantaged consumers.” Identify the parties to the litigation and the alleged breaches of the ACL Summarise and highlight key facts Identify the breaches of the ACL and summarise why the court reached its decision Indicate and explain one or two cases that the court applied. Highlight the facts the court found important Identify remedies and penalties that the court imposed. Explain if you agree whether they are appropriate. Do you agree that consumers need this degree of protection? Explain your answer.