Revision Questions.

FULL QUESTION · ENGLISH

Bert runs a small plumbing business employing himself and one apprentice, Sally. The business operates through a company, Bert’s Better Plumbing Pty Ltd (BBP). In January 2023, Bert, on behalf of BBP, purchased for $120,000 a new SUV, a “Jumbuck” luxury model, for use in the business. Bert was an astute purchaser, having recently completed a university course on consumer protection. Before contracting to purchase the SUV, he discussed its features and capabilities at some length with Julie, a sales representative of the dealer, Parkville Motors Ltd (PML). During these discussions, Bert made it clear to Julie that the vehicle needed to have off-road capability because many clients of the business lacked proper road access. Julie assured Bert that the vehicle had this capability because it was one of the few SUVs currently on the market that was wholly made in Australia. Showing Bert a sales brochure produced by the manufacturer, Jumbuck Ltd, Julie also stated that the SUV was fuel efficient—five litres per 100 kilometres—and had a great resale value, depreciating by less than 10% per annum. Convinced by Julie’s statements, BBP entered into a contract to purchase the SUV. The contract included the following term: “PML has taken all reasonable care to ensure that any representations or warranties it or its staff have made or given are accurate, factual and current. However, purchasers should make their own inquiries and PML accepts no responsibility for honest errors.” Bert drove the SUV throughout 2024 without incident other than its fuel consumption far exceeding five litres per 100 kilometres, something Bert estimated had cost BBP $10,000 during that year. Problems then occurred in March 2025 when he drove the vehicle off-road while attempting to reach a client living in the Dandenong Ranges. Almost immediately, the vehicle experienced mechanical problems and came to an abrupt halt. Because the SUV could not be driven, it was towed to PML for repair by Top Tow Trucks Ltd (TTT). During the tow, TTT’s driver negligently collided with another vehicle. This caused an estimated $40,000 damage to the other vehicle and an estimated $20,000 damage to BBP’s SUV. TTT now seeks to recover the $40,000 from BBP and denies liability for the $20,000 damage to the SUV, relying on the following term in its towing contract, which Bert had read carefully before signing: “All towing is at the vehicle owner’s risk. We accept no responsibility or liability for any loss or damage arising out of our performance of this contract. Owners are required to indemnify TTT for any and all liability of any nature whatsoever incurred whilst performing this contract.” It was later determined that the SUV was not suitable for off-road driving and, as at 15 June 2025, was worth only $70,000. In part, this was because it had been made overseas without being subjected to harsh Australian conditions during product development. Jumbuck Ltd merely imported the SUV in parts and assembled it in Australia, claiming that this allowed it to describe the vehicles as “made in Australia”. After being repaired, the SUV was being driven in Melbourne in May 2025 when its airbag exploded even though the vehicle had not been involved in a collision. The explosion was attributed to a manufacturing defect. Metal fragments injured Sally, who was in the vehicle with Bert, and Chin Yen, a pedestrian passing by on her way to work. The explosion also damaged the work computer Chin Yen was carrying. Please identify the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) rights and liabilities arising on these facts, explaining in each case the basis upon which the right or liability arises and the remedy or penalty that may follow.

FULL QUESTION · ENGLISH

Possible short-form question: “Sally purchased a tractor—or, in the alternative version, a Gold Coast home unit—from Bert. She is unhappy with it and wants to know whether there is anything she can do.” The examiner may add one or two further facts and then ask: “Please identify the possible Australian Consumer Law (ACL) rights and liabilities arising out of this scenario, explaining in each case the basis upon which the right or liability arises and the remedy or penalty that may follow. Should you require further information, please say what this is and why it is needed.”

FULL QUESTION · ENGLISH

In 2023, Property Pty Ltd, relying on advice from its engineers, Engineering Ltd, published advertisements in the Melbourne Gazette stating that the houses it had built in Gherang were made of steel and would be connected to the internet in June 2025. Relying on this advertisement, Mary purchased a house from Property. Neither statement was correct. Identify the transactions and events that may give rise to Australian Consumer Law rights or liabilities. Explain the possible contraventions, identify the parties who may be liable or entitled to a remedy, and outline the private remedies or public-enforcement consequences that may follow.