Court rules JJ Richards contracts unfair

This is the first court action by the ACCC to enforce new laws that protect small businesses from unfair contract terms.

The Federal Court has declared that eight terms in the standard form contract used by JJ Richards to engage small businesses are unfair, and therefore void, following ACCC action.

JJ Richards is one of the largest privately-owned waste management companies in Australia and provides recycling, sanitary and green waste collection services.

ACCC deputy chair Dr Michael Schaper said it was the first court action by the ACCC to enforce new laws that protect small businesses from unfair contract terms.

“Under Australian Consumer Law, terms that create a significant power imbalance between parties, are not necessary to protect legitimate interests, and which would cause significant financial detriment to a small business if relied on, are unfair and void.

“The court’s decision serves as a reminder to large businesses to review their standard form contracts and make sure they don’t include any unfair terms. The ACCC will not hesitate to take appropriate action to ensure large businesses are complying with the unfair contract terms provisions.”

The court declared by consent that eight terms in JJ Richards’ standard form contracts with small businesses, which were entered into or renewed after 12 November 2016, were unfair and consequently void. These terms had the effect of:

  • binding customers to subsequent contracts unless they cancelled the contract within 30 days before the end of the term
  • allowing JJ Richards to unilaterally increase its prices
  • removing any liability for JJ Richards where its performance is “prevented or hindered in any way”
  • allowing JJ Richards to charge customers for services not rendered even when caused by reasons beyond the customer’s control
  • granting JJ Richards exclusive rights to remove waste from a customer’s premises
  • allowing JJ Richards to suspend its service but continue to charge the customer if payment is not made after seven days
  • creating an unlimited indemnity in favour of JJ Richards
  • preventing customers from terminating their contracts if they have payments outstanding and entitling JJ Richards to continue charging customers equipment rental after the termination of the contract.

In finding that each of the terms was unfair, his judge also found that “the Impugned Terms tend to exacerbate each other, increasing the overall imbalance between the parties and the risk of detriment to JJR customers.”

JJ Richards consented to orders restraining it from relying on the unfair terms in existing small business contracts and from using the terms in future contracts with small businesses.

JJ Richards will also publish a corrective notice and provide a copy of the court’s orders to all its small business customers which are parties to an affected contract.

Comment below to have your say on this story.

If you have a news story or tip-off, get in touch at

Sign up to INCLEAN’s newsletter.

Leave a comment:

Your email address will not be published. All fields are required