Analysis of Australian Litigation and Corporations: Case Report

This report analyzes two case reports concerning Australian litigation and corporations. The first case, ACCC v Woolworths Limited, examines the role of the ACCC and the legal issues surrounding the company's conduct. The analysis focuses on the evidence presented, the shortcomings of the ACCC's case, and the implications for directors' responsibilities. The second case, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) V JJ Richards & Sons Pty Ltd (JJR), explores the impact of unfair contract terms on small businesses. The report highlights the importance of clear and transparent legal language, the imbalance of obligations in standard contracts, and the implications of the case for future business practices. The report also emphasizes the importance of litigation in setting precedents and guiding future legal actions by the ACCC.

Running head: AUSTRALIAN LITIGATON AND CORPORATIONS
Australian Litigation and Corporations
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1AUSTRALIAN LITIGATON AND CORPORATIONS
Case Report 1
ACCC v Woolworths limited [2016] FCA 1472
Answer 1
The report did not explain the role of the corporation in the litigation completely as it
briefly mentioned that the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) empowers regulators to
obtain documents, evidence and information under section of the Act. It did not mention the
obligations of companies not to engage in unconscionable conduct1.
Answer 2
The legal issues raised in the report were not clearly identified as the allegations were
emphasized mainly on the conduct of the company instead of emphasizing more on the
‘existence of a scheme’. It simply stated how the store managers required the suppliers to
compensate for the discrepancies of the company. It merely mentioned about the breaches
committed by the company under sections [21, 22], Schedule 2 of the Competition and
Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)2.
Answer 3
The analysis and explanation provided in this report were convincing as the ACCC failed to
provide sufficient evidence to institute the case against Woolworths. It merely relied on the
documentary evidences and did not obtain any evidence from the suppliers in question.
Answer 4
1 ACCC v Woolworths limited [2016] FCA 1472.
2 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) at section [21], [22].

2AUSTRALIAN LITIGATON AND CORPORATIONS
As per the information provided, the importance of litigation has not been sufficiently
drawn as it signified that despite committing breach of the business obligations, ACCC must not
initiate legal proceedings against the directors only on the ground that they have limited liability.
This would provide an opportunity to the directors to commit violations and get away. Injunction
as a remedy can be sought against any company directors which would refrain them from
committing violations of their business obligations.
Case Report 2
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) V JJ Richards & Sons Pty Ltd
(JJR) [2017] FCA 1224
Answer 1
The report explained the role of the corporation in the litigation, which is to safeguard
small businesses from unfair terms with respect to the business-to-business standard form
contracts. The ACCC intended to seek preliminary discovery and initiated injunction to refrain
JJR from relying on eight ‘impugned terms’ that were later found to be void under section 23(1)
of the ACL3.
Answer 2
The legal issues raised in this case report were clearly identified as they lacked
transparency and the words were ambiguous written in legal language instead of English
language4. The terms were said to form significant imbalance between the obligations and rights
3 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) at section [23(1)].
4 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) V JJ Richards & Sons Pty Ltd (JJR) [2017] FCA
1224.

3AUSTRALIAN LITIGATON AND CORPORATIONS
between the customers and the business, which would have been detriment to the business if they
were relied upon.
Answer 3
The logical explanations provided in the report is convincing as it explained the
circumstances under which JJR could have avoided the legal proceedings and that JJR failed to
comprehend the consequences of using unfair contract terms with small businesses.
Answer 4
The importance of litigation has been explained properly in this case report. This case
shall act as a landmark case for all the businesses as several businesses will review their standard
contract terms while entering into contracts. This case shall enable the ACCC to determine
similar cases and compare the issues with the circumstances of this case to proceed with an
action.

4AUSTRALIAN LITIGATON AND CORPORATIONS
References
ACCC v Woolworths limited [2016] FCA 1472
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) V JJ Richards & Sons Pty Ltd
(JJR) [2017] FCA 1224.
Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)