Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Limited

In the case of ACCC v DuluxGroup (Australia) Pty Limited, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) initiated proceedings against Dulux for making misleading or deceptive representations about the performance capabilities of its heat reflective paints, Dulux AcraTex InfraCOOL and Dulux Weathershield Heat Reflect. The court found in a preliminary hearing (FCA 1158) that Dulux's promotional materials, including in-store displays, webpages, social media posts, print advertisements, and videos, made representations that the paints could significantly reduce interior temperatures and surface temperatures, for which Dulux did not have reasonable grounds. Dulux subsequently admitted that these "Heat Reflect Representations" were misleading and in contravention of consumer law. Ultimately, the Federal Court declared that Dulux had engaged in misleading conduct, ordered Dulux to publish notices in a newspaper and on its website, and imposed a pecuniary penalty of $400,000 along with $150,000 in costs. The court considered the seriousness of the conduct to be at the lower to middling end, the extent of the marketing campaign, the lack of a sufficiently robust compliance program, and mitigating factors such as Dulux's cooperation with the ACCC and the remedial steps taken.