Shaun Temby
Shaun has over two decades of expertise in commercial disputes, competition, and consumer law and provides strategic legal solutions to franchising and consumer markets clients.
View profile
Dynamic pricing has become a familiar part of the online buying experience. From airline fares and hotel bookings to ridesharing and event tickets, prices can move according to demand, supply, inventory and other real-time factors.
But as algorithms, AI and access to consumer data make pricing increasingly sophisticated, businesses need to consider how these practices interact with the Australian Consumer Law.
In this episode of Watchdog, Partner and podcast host, Shaun Temby, is joined by Maddocks Lawyer, Kate Morel, to examine the consumer law issues surrounding dynamic pricing.
They discuss how existing protections against misleading or deceptive conduct, component pricing, unconscionable conduct and unfair contract terms can apply when prices change during the purchasing process. They also explore emerging unfair trading practices and the risks that can arise when increasingly automated pricing systems operate with limited human oversight.
Kate Morel is a Lawyer in Maddocks' Dispute Resolution and Litigation team with expertise in litigation, alternative dispute resolution, and employment law for private and public sector clients. Kate’s experience gives her a practical and commercially focused view of Australian Consumer Law, and in this episode, how it particularly applies to emerging pricing practices.
That'll cost extra: Dynamic pricing and why your algorithm might need a lawyer
The Watchdog podcast series discusses the ACCC’s leading cases throughout the year and how well they performed against their priorities.
Shaun has over two decades of expertise in commercial disputes, competition, and consumer law and provides strategic legal solutions to franchising and consumer markets clients.
View profileKeep up to date with our legal insights and events
Sign upNew laws in NSW will impose obligations on ‘brand owners’ of solar panels to ensure responsible recycling.
More courts have held social media platforms liable for the ‘addictive’ design features of their platforms.
The Court has confirmed that an arbitration clause in a click-wrap user agreement was an unfair contract term and void.
When does promotional language cross the line into misleading conduct?
Partner
Sydney