Business Law Case Studies with ACL Analysis

Running head: BUSINESS LAW
BUSINESS LAW
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

BUSINESS LAW1

BUSINESS LAW2
Question 1
Issue
The issue is to determine whether Gaming the Gamers Pty Ltd have breached the
Australian Consumer Law and whether Asaf could make a claim against the company.
Rule
Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 lays down the Australian
Consumer Law (ACL) that strives to protect the consumers from any misleading or deceptive
conduct of the seller1. Section 29 of the ACL states that a person in trade must not supply or
promote to supply goods or services by making a misleading or false representation
pertaining to the standard, value, quality, grade, composition, style or model of such goods or
services2. Section 35 restricts bait advertisement by virtue of which the traders must not
promote his products in such a way which would give a wrong impression of such products,
deluding the consumer and making him purchase the product for a purpose which would not
match up to its real description3.
Application
In this case, Gaming the Gamers Pty Ltd had published a false and misleading
advertisement of a top-of-the-computer which gave an impression that it came along with a
42-inch screen monitor and several tower speaker. The advertisement said that the ‘gaming
package’ was for $4000; however, in fact the ‘gaming package’ did not include the monitor
and the speakers. It included a different model of computer from the same brand, having a
different capacity. This shows that the company violated the provision of the ACL that
restrict false advertisement of goods.
Conclusion
1 Competition and Consumer Act 2010, schedule 2.
2 Australian Consumer Law, s 29.
3 Australian Consumer Law, s 35