Pricing errors remain one of the most persistent (and often misunderstood) compliance risks under the Australian Consumer Law (ACL). While many businesses are familiar with headline prohibitions such as misleading or deceptive conduct and false or misleading representations, fewer appreciate the specific and technical pricing obligations imposed by the ACL.

This article examines price‑transparency requirements under sections 47, 48 and 29(1)(i) of the ACL, and considers the ACCC’s recent action against EconomyBookings (EB). Although the action focused on sections 48 and 29(1)(i), the allegations illustrate how all three provisions can operate in tandem, underscoring the need for precision and consistency when displaying prices.

UNDERSTANDING THE ACL’S COMPONENT AND SINGLE‑PRICE REQUIREMENTS

SECTION 47: LOWEST DISPLAYED PRICE OBLIGATIONS

Section 47 prohibits a business from supplying goods or services for a price higher than the lowest displayed price where more than one price is shown to the consumer.

In practice, this means that if a business pre‑selects add‑ons or extras, the displayed price must include the cost of those add‑ons. Alternatively, the business must remove pre‑selection and allow consumers to choose any add‑ons themselves. A headline price that excludes pre‑selected extras risks contravening section 47.

SECTION 48: SINGLE PRICING REQUIREMENTS

Section 48 requires that, when a business presents a price to consumers, it must display a single figure that represents the minimum total price payable for the goods or services. This includes:

• taxes
• duties
• mandatory fees
• pre‑selected charges

Optional add‑ons chosen by the consumer can be displayed separately, but anything pre‑selected by the business must be included in the single price.

SECTION 29: MISLEADING OR FALSE REPRESENTATIONS ABOUT PRICE

Section 29(1)(i) prohibits a business from making false or misleading representations about the price of goods or services.

This provision is broader than sections 47 and 48. A business can still breach section 29 if, despite eventually showing the correct total price, its headings, labels or on‑screen prompts suggest that items are included when they are not.

This was a central issue in the ACCC’s action against EconomyBookings, which alleged that the website wording “Your car rental includes…” misleadingly suggested that pre‑selected add‑ons were included in the displayed base price when they were not.

WHAT ALLEGEDLY HAPPENED WITH EB?

FACTS

The ACCC alleged that EB’s website displayed a low base rental price for its vehicles (for example, $147.10) representing the rental fee without any extras. However:

• the page displaying the original $147.10 price stated that “[y]our car rental includes” various items such as last‑minute cancellation protection, roadside assistance, and “full coverage” insurance;
• at checkout, it became apparent that these included items were actually pre-selected “add‑ons”, increasing the checkout price to $315.04; and
• consumers needed to actively opt out of these extras to pay the original $147.10.

SECTION 48 CLAIM – FAILURE TO SHOW A SINGLE PRICE

The ACCC alleged that EB breached section 48 by failing to present the total price as a single figure. Instead, EB:

• displayed the base rental price (exclusive of pre‑selected extras); and
• Separately displayed a higher price including those extras.

Because the add‑ons were pre‑selected by EB, the ACCC alleged that the total price shown to consumers should have included them from the outset.

INTERACTION WITH SECTION 29 – FALSE AND MISEADING REPRESENTATIONS

The ACCC further alleged that EB made a false or misleading representation under section 29(1)(i) of the ACL by presenting the pre‑selected add‑ons under the heading “Your car rental includes,” immediately adjacent to the $147.10 price, thereby suggesting that the extras formed part of that price when they did not.

WHAT ABOUT SECTION 47?

Although not specifically raised against EB, it was arguably open to the ACCC to allege this amounted to displaying multiple prices and failing to offer the lowest one, in breach of section 47.

PENALTIES IMPOSED AND NO ADMISSION OF LIABILITY

Following these alleged pricing issues, the ACCC issued two infringement notices to EB in respect of sections 29(1) and 48 of the ACL. The infringement notices totalled $39,600 and were paid by EB. It is important to note that the payment of an infringement notice does not constitute an admission of wrongdoing under the ACL. It provides a mechanism to resolve alleged contraventions without court proceedings.

SECTION 48 AND UNQUANTIFIABLE COSTS: WHAT IF THE PRICE CAN’T YET BE CALCULATED?

Section 48 includes an important qualification: businesses are not required to incorporate costs that genuinely cannot be quantified until additional information is obtained from the customer.

Under section 48(7), unquantifiable fees may be excluded from the single price provided the business clearly discloses that an extra charge applies and calculates it as soon as practicable.

ACCC EXAMPLE: CLEANING FEES FOR HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION

The ACCC gives the example of serviced apartments advertised “from $117 per night” where a $7 per‑person cleaning fee applies. Because the business does not know how many people will stay until a booking is made:

• it cannot calculate the exact total price in the advertisement, but
• it should include the minimum fee ($7), assuming at least one guest.

Once guest numbers are known, the full total price must be disclosed during the booking process.

APPLICATION TO SHIPPING/DELIVERY FEES

This principle applies equally to shipping/delivery fees. Where a business cannot calculate shipping/delivery fees without knowing the customer’s delivery location:

• it will usually be excused from including those fees in the single price;
• but it must still alert customers that additional shipping/delivery costs apply; and
• should include at least the minimum shipping/delivery cost.

HOW CAN WE HELP?

Our dedicated consumer law team can assist you with ensuring your pricing representations comply with the ACL, including advice on:

• single pricing
• pre‑selected extras and optional fees
• online checkout and digital design practices
• risk assessments and compliance programs
• false and misleading representations

If you would like tailored advice or support with a pricing review, please get in touch.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

Please contact the authoring Partner or visit our website to learn more about our Competition and Consumer Groups.

This article was written by Teresa Torcasio, Partner, Alysha Schutz, Special Counsel, and Kaitlyn Firnigl, Solicitor.