Answers to Questions on Advertising

Answer to Question 6

The Parkdale Custom Furniture v Puxu ("Puxu") was presided over by the Full Court, and the decisions that came out had a great impact in the mode of business operations that individual conduct. The High Court argued that the Full Court should not have put into place the principle in Puxu and for that matter, it had to highlight some of the reasons for the same (Cavanagh, 1994, p.47). Conclusively, the decision from the High Court made the Puxu way much different from the TPG advertising.

Since the high court concluded that Puxu case did not have any connection to the TPG advertising, it had to come up with its way of reasoning out the ideas at hand. The case of Puxu entailed an issue of coming up with a misleading advert that had fully independent aspects. The appellant took part in the selling of products which has some similarity to the ones that the respondent was selling. There was a case of copying and using the same brand without getting permission from the original developer of the product.

The High Court was not by the precedent as the target audience did not display the characteristics of potential purchasers. The court used this claim as the subject matter did not show any interests from the purchases that they had made since the advert was carried out (Cavanagh, 1994, p.50). Further, the High Court opined that the consumer should be careful as he or she is getting into a contract. Regardless of that, the entire case did not involve any consumer protection as the primary mission was to use the advertisement in misleading them as it entailed an erroneous message. Therefore, the High Court was on the stand that the ad misled the consumer. It bore a message which could not be presided over from the fact that the users should take reasonable care.

Also, the high court explained that the Full Court did not recognize that the primary purpose of the coming up with the advertisement. The main idea was to lure the customers into having an agreement with the TPG. The agreement was to carry on against the competitor, and in that case, it had to incorporate a misleading message in the form of an advert. However, the Puxu case had a contrary intention. They developed the ad as a way of making the customers agree and enter into a contract without any other hidden agenda. They had an intention of doing business as usual without going against the provisions of the law.

Answer to Question 7

The High Court was in charge of ruling over the ACCC v TPG case (White, 2014, p.1). The ruling had some angles from which one can come up with advice based on the field of marketing. As a marketing officer in the company, there is advice that I would give to the company as it wants to come up with a new advert. One of the advice is that, after they come up with an advertisement idea, they should ensure that all the clauses have not hidden parts that could have misleading aspects. If the advert has some offers or additional payments, the customs should be well notified so that there can be no case of deception. The other advice is that the company should ensure that all the target audiences are on the first line of prioritization whenever a declaimer is put across. The benefit to this is that there will be no dispute in case one of them claims that the advert did not bear all the characteristics that the law dictates when doing a marketing activity.

References

Cavanagh, P., 1994. Adventure tourism brochures: an analysis of legal content. Australian Journal of Hospitality Management, 1(2), pp. 47-53

White, C., 2014. An Introduction to the Bail Act 2013. Judicial Officers Bulletin, 26(1), p.1