The Australian legal system has zero concept of punitive damages.
You can only have repertory (recuperative) damages.
There are no "monetary payments to deter future crime" in Australian civil law.
Digest that one for a second.
You can only have repertory (recuperative) damages.
There are no "monetary payments to deter future crime" in Australian civil law.
Digest that one for a second.
Deterrence is regularly a factor in civil infringement cases brought by regulators.
In other civil lawsuits, ordinarily damages are strictly ‘compensatory’. However, ‘exemplary’ damages also exist in some circumstances; and functionally identical to punitive damages.
In Australia, criminal behaviour can incur fines[1]:
> Fines are monetary fines (criminal penalty) imposed by courts in criminal proceedings. Criminal standard of proof is required.
The ACCC has pretty significant ability to impose penalties:
> The maximum penalties per breach of the ACL [..] maximum penalties for breaches [..] will be the greater of: $10,000,000; or If Court can determine "reasonably attributable" benefit obtained, 3 times that value, or if Court cannot determine benefit, 10% of annual turnover in preceding 12 months.
[1] https://www.accc.gov.au/business/business-rights-protections...
Not all fines are punitive damages.
The nature of the business though is that they're almost never awarded, except maybe for contempt of court?
Certainly not in a significant quantity against a corporation.
They are awarded in a certain sets of circumstances. Contempt of court is far from the only example
substantial sums exemplary damages are certainly capable of being awarded against a corporation on the right set of facts
I might be missing something but it seems like a good idea that a civil court is unable to punish people after deciding it is necessary to encourage them not to break a criminal law in future.
Australia does presumably have punitive fines and other punishments that are for deterrence in criminal punishments?
If I can steal $5 from you, and the worst thing that happens if I get caught is that I have to give the $5 back, what sort of incentive do you think that creates?
Theft is a criminal matter, and there are punitive remedies for crimes.
It's the same concept. If a corporation commits a civil crime, the maximum in damages it can repay is the amount of damage it caused, give or take interest.
> It's the same concept. If a corporation commits a civil crime, the maximum in damages it can repay is the amount of damage it caused, give or take interest.
It sounds like you're just making that up. I found the agency and the page on the regulation being breached:
https://www.accc.gov.au/business/business-rights-protections...
The maximum penalties per breach of the ACL including unconscionable conduct, making false or misleading representations, and supplying consumer goods or certain services that do not comply with safety standards or which are banned:
For corporations, will be the greater of:
* $10,000,000*
* 3 times the value of the benefit received, or
* 10% of annual turnover in preceding 12 months, if court cannot determine benefit obtained from the offence.
So what's the basis for what your seemingly contradictory claims?
But the corporation didn't break a criminal law like the person in this example.
> But maybe you're on to something, here - perhaps they should.
Directors and executives can absolutely get convicted of crimes relating to their operation and oversight of the company. Whether the laws and investigating agencies have as much power as they should is very debatable but the legal framework is there.
There have been a few posts in the last couple of days of people posting inaccurate information with complete confidence
I have some bad news for you
They'll simply do the cost/benefit equation on breaking the law.
Only criminal charges against corporate officers and punitive damages promotes change.
Absolutely. The discussion is centered on fines to companies but the other side is personal punishment of the actual physical people who made the decision to break the law.
That's a factual statement without any evidence supporting it. There's plenty of punitive damages against drug abuse and do you see any signs of it working ?
Compared to individuals addicted to illegal substances.