You web browser may not be properly supported. To use this site and all its features we recommend using the latest versions of Chrome, Safari or Firefox

Slater and Gordon are continuing to service the community during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Click here for more info


The provisions of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) are the big guns of consumer protection legislation in Australia. But how do they apply to online dealings between Australian consumers and foreign companies? The recent decision of ACCC v Valve in the Federal Court of Australia has provided some clarity on these issues.

Proceedings were commenced by the ACCC against Valve, a company based in Washington state, USA, most well known for its immensely popular Steam software distribution platform and online multiplayer games such as Counterstrike.

The ACCC alleged Valve engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct under the ACL by telling its customers that in no circumstances would any fees paid to Valve be refundable.

Under the ACL, consumers have the protection of a guarantee that any goods purchased are of “acceptable quality”. If the goods fail to meet this standard, consumers are entitled to a refund, or other remedies. It is also a specific offence under the ACL to make false or misleading representations about the existence or effect of consumer guarantees, which is what the ACCC alleged Valve did.

Valve attempted to argue the ACL did not apply because:

  1. Valve did not engage in conduct in Australia, or carry on business in Australia - the Court did not accept this in circumstances where Valve maintained servers worth $1.2m in Australia, had approximately 2.2m Australian subscribers and incurred tens of thousands of dollars in Australian expenses every month. Further, the making of the misleading and deceptive representations about ‘no refunds’ to Australia consumers constituted conduct in Australia;
  2. the contract between Valve and the end user expressly stated the laws of Washington state applied – however the Court found this did not prevent the application of the ACL;
  3. it did not “supply goods” within the meaning of the ACL, but only a “service” via a licence agreement – the Court noted that the definition of “goods” under the ACL specifically includes computer software and, while Valve did provide some “services”, the provision of software was at the heart of its business.

The decision confirms that Australian consumers can enforce their rights under the consumer guarantees in the ACL against foreign companies who provide goods such as software. This is the case despite any statements or agreement that the ACL does not apply.

The contents of this blog post are considered accurate as at the date of publication. However the applicable laws may be subject to change, thereby affecting the accuracy of the article. The information contained in this blog post is of a general nature only and is not specific to anyone’s personal circumstances. Please seek legal advice before acting on any of the information contained in this post.

Thank you for your feedback.

Related blog posts

Consumer and the Law
Liar loans: how mortgage brokers are putting clients at risk

The term ‘liar loans’ has been coined on the back of the Banking Royal Commission. This is because studies have shown almost 40 per cent of loan applications completed through mortgage brokers contained at least one factually incorrect statement. Whether mortgage brokers are providing lenders with incorrect information, or information that is out-of-date, they are putting themselves – and their clients – at risk. A recent study conducted by the Consumer Credit Legal Centre in New South Wales identified some mortgage brokers were breaking the law when filling out loan applications for their clients. Common examples included brokers suggesting their clients provide a different answer...

Planning desk close up documentresize
Consumer and the Law
How to lodge a complaint with Australian Financial Complaints Authority

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) acts as the middleperson between financial firms and consumers or small businesses, offering free and independent dispute resolution services. It deals with complaints about financial advice, insurance, banking and superannuation products and services. While the time limit to lodge a complaint to AFCA is usually between two and six years, the Australian Government recently created the opportunity for those with complaints up to 10 years old to come forward. This means consumers and small businesses have until 30 June 2020 to lodge complaints dating back to 1 January 2008. To lodge a complaint, you must follow AFCA’s process. It is...

How to lodge a complaint with Australian Financial Complaints Authority
Business Law
Proposed Changes to the Franchising Code of Conduct

Franchising is big business in Australia, with approximately 1,120 franchise systems and 79,000 franchise units operating nationally1. As franchising is a diverse sector with characteristics that are unique from other business models, franchises are governed by a mandatory Franchising Code of Conduct (Franchising Code).2 The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services recently completed an inquiry into the operation and effectiveness of the Franchising Code and has released the Fairness in Franchising Report (Report).3 Some of the key findings and recommendations of the report are discussed below. The Committee recommends that the Australian Government establish an...

Waitress In Black Apron Upload

We're here to help

Start your online claim check now. Or, if you have a question, get in touch with our team.