Strata Plan v 3A Composites [2026] FCA 351
Strata headed a class action against 3A under consumer guarantee provisions in the Australian Consumer Law concerning aluminium composite panels implicated in high-profile residential fires4.
Although the consumer guarantees are beneficial legislation, limitations on them need not be given a liberal interpretation. Those limitations reflect a practical balance between competing public interests. They ‘should be interpreted carefully in order not to destroy that balance’5. Anderson J (at [841]) rejected 3A’s attempt to characterise substantive parts of the consumer guarantees as ‘limiting provisions’ in argument to narrow the scope of those guarantees.
This principle is from Episode 134 of interpretation NOW!
Footnotes:
4 Lacrosse fire Melbourne (2014); Grenfell fire London (2017).
5 Adelaide [2004] FCAFC 183 [17], Aliraja [2025] WASCA 103 [36].