Most Recent
Coles has told a court that its decision to change its discount policies was unsurprising during a period of significant inflation, denying claims by the ACCC that its ‘Down Down’ promotions were misleading.
Coles increased prices on hundreds of products only as part of a plan to later mark them with a ‘Down Down’ promotion, despite the price being lower only weeks before, the ACCC has argued.
Another Coles manager has faced questioning in a case alleging the supermarket giant's 'Down Down' campaign was illusory, admitting the "only reason" for a four-week price jump on quince paste was to enable a discount.
The ACCC has attacked the evidence at trial of a Coles manager who signed off on an alleged misleading discount on dog food, which was sold at a lower price just seven days earlier.
The former manager of biscuits and cookies at Coles has faced cross-examination by the ACCC over marking Arnott’s Shapes with a 'Down Down' discount, despite the price being 50 cents less four weeks prior.
Facing claims it misled customers with its 'Down Down' pricing, Coles has urged the court not to second guess its judgment, but a judge overseeing the case has said competitive pressures do not excuse misleading promotions.
Coles changed its marketing policies after being concerned it could not compete with Woolworths, a court has heard on the first day of trial in the consumer regulator’s case over the supermarket's “utterly misleading” discounts.
A law firm that was set to argue that two firms formed an anti-competitive agreement in cooperating to run an ad tech class action against Google has dropped its appeal of its failed bid to run the representative case.
Piper Alderman claims a judge erred in finding there was no evidence that an agreement between Maurice Blackburn and Phi Finney McDonald to cooperate in running an ad tech class action against Google was struck for an anti-competitive purpose.
A judge has approved a 33 per cent group costs order in a class action against Sportsbet, saying the relatively high rate was justified by the risks of running the “relatively novel case", which seeks repayment of gambling losses stemming from allegedly unlawful services.