FREE ARTICLE!
Over the past 10 months, Australia’s national consumer protection agency, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has taken action for misleading labelling against some food products produced by Arnott’s Biscuits, Tasti Products (Weight Watchers), Nudie Foods, Natur-all (Go Natural) and Harvey Fresh. However, a more recent decision of the Federal Court seems to offer a more practical solution than the ACCC approach to fruit-based food representations. Although some of the claims made by the abovementioned food companies in relation to some of the products were either incorrect or overstated or potentially misleading and were therefore in actual breach of the Trade Practices Act, the ACCC had recently appeared to be overstepping the mark in its ongoing campaign aimed at food labels that refer to fruit ingredients.

With the rapid advancement of technology, the courts are more and more looking to science to help them ascertain questions of fact. This article examines instances where the body of scientific evidence on a particular issue has decided the outcome of the action.

The use of ‘serve’ as a measure of the average consumption of a particular food has long been used by nutritionists to describe a level of recommended consumption for a particular food. This article considers the legal relevance of the ‘serve’ or ‘serve sizes’ for food labelling and advertising purposes. We consider whether the concept of ‘serve’ or ‘serve size’ is being manipulated or abused, and we analyse possible areas for legal redress.

The mis-labelling or failure to make appropriate declarations of allergens in food can result in serious consequences for food businesses. The Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Food Standards Code) sets out obligations to make appropriate declarations on the packaging of certain food items with allergenic properties. This article explains what laws might impact on the food supplier.

This article is divided into two parts. This first part will discuss the obligations that arise from the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code and the second part (to be published in next month’s FoodLegal Bulletin, “Legal implications of mis-labelling and omitting allergen information”), discusses the legal consequences that can arise from failing to adhere to the obligations.

Food inspectors are the legally authorised officers who conduct inspections of food premises to ensure against breaches of the local Food Acts. This article investigates what procedures and rights exist for food business owners in relation to food inspectors and food inspections.

FREE ARTICLE!
Recent developments in food law including:

• The latest on the WA Food Bill
• Update on ACCC v Arnott’s
• ACCC takes action against a fruit juice manufacturer
• MoU signed between two government agencies
• Consumer Affairs Victoria issues public warning on certain beverage product