The Australian Consumer Law

Case study

Table of Contents
Introduction...............................................................................................................................2
Main Context..............................................................................................................................2
Legal and professional jurisdictions.......................................................................................2
Organizational, social and cultural factors.............................................................................7
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................7
References..................................................................................................................................9
1

Introduction
Australia Consumer Law provides protection to consumers from unsafe products, scams and
unfair trade practices carried out by the organizations. The law includes a wide range of
protections which assists consumers in purchasing safe products and services. The
Australian Consumer Law focuses on unfair contract conditions, consumer rights while
purchasing products and services, product safety, legislation for unsolicited agreements and
penalties. The consumers have the right to take legal actions against an organization for
providing inappropriate products and services. The Australian Competition and Consumer
Commission are considered to be an independent Commonwealth statutory authority which
plays a significant role in enforcing the Competition and Consumer Act 2010. It also consists
of legislation, regulating infrastructure, fair trading and promote competition for the benefit
of all the people in Australia. The case "Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v
Cornerstone Investment Aust Pty Ltd (in liq) (No 4) [2018] FCA 1408” depicts the unfair
trade practices which were against the law. The actions were taken by the Australian
Competition and Consumer Act 2010 for providing protection to the people of the society
(austlii.edu.au, 2018). The implementation of rules and regulations for the protection of the
consumers is considered to be a social worker.
The ethical rules and regulations need to be followed by an organization and people within
the community. The democratic principles and values embraced by the Australian
Association of Social Workers are being explained in the constitution of AASW (2008) (Aasw,
2010). The principles and values are as follows:
Complying with the code of ethics
Believing in equal rights for all human beings
Commitment to plural democratic community with equal opportunity and equality
as per the law
Respecting other including fairness, justice, justice, and compassion
Accepting the uniqueness of people
Belief in collaborating the cornerstone of practice
Valuing communities and families as social structures importance to well being and
functioning of society and individuals
2

Positive changes in the development and growth of human beings
Individual choice and collective and personal responsibility
High-quality provision for social work service
Valuing difference and diversity
Promoting human rights
The ethical principles can assist the social workers to help people of the community in an
appropriate manner. The ethics are being explained clearly in the code of ethics of the
Australian Association of Social Workers.
Main Context
Legal and professional jurisdictions
The case shows inappropriate use of the VET FEE-HELP Assistance Scheme. Under the Higher
Education Support Act 2003, the program VET FEE-HELP was provided to students under
which they get loans for enrolling into the vocational training and education courses. The
applicants exploited as per Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and the
Commonwealth of Australia. The organization traded formally as the Empower Institute was
being approved as “VET provider” as per the clause 6 of scheme1 A of HES Act. Jim Yang was
the sole shareholder and director but in 2014, Dr. JooGim Heaney became the chief
executive officer. No claims were being against the senior executives in the proceedings
(Burrell &McGinn, 2009).
The applicants seek relief that rose from alleged conventions of sections 18,29 and 21of the
Australian Consumer Law. Section 29 and 18 prohibit deceptive or misleading conduct about
products and services and section 21 prevents unconscionable conduct. The alleged
contraventions of empowers were being challenged under section 74,76,75,79 and 78. The
record of empowering depicted that 8425 students completed their course during that
period. It represented that less than one percent of those students who got the loan from
the scheme were being enrolled in the course. An amount of $64188285.90 was being
received as payments from VET FEE-HELP. The figure depicts wastage of government funds
because million of money was received as debt but did not achieve the educational
3