New Zealand: Consumer Law Reform Bill: would a late change to the Bill be unconscionable?

Last Updated: 30 May 2012

By Andrew Peterson and Sarah Keene

The Consumer Law Reform Bill (the "Bill"), which proposes the most significant changes to consumer laws in New Zealand in more than 20 years, passed its first reading in the House in February and has now been referred to the Commerce Select Committee (the "Select Committee") for consideration.

It was unsurprising that the Bill passed its first reading given it has strong bipartisan support from all ends of the political spectrum. What was somewhat surprising, however, was that during the first reading the Minister of Consumer Affairs, Chris Tremain, invited the Select Committee to consider whether the Bill should include additional amendments to the Fair Trading Act 1986, legislating against:

  • Unfair contract terms; and
  • Unconscionable conduct.

While such provisions had initially been recommended by the Ministry of Consumer Affairs (the "Ministry"), the previous Minister of Consumer Affairs, John Boscawen, advised Cabinet to exclude them from the Bill in the face of considerable negative feedback from the business community and his view that such provisions may result in significant compliance costs for businesses with little or no benefit.

MPs from the Labour and Green parties also spoke in favour of including such provisions in the Bill during its first reading and this cross-party support increases the likelihood that such provisions could ultimately find their way into the Bill.

This Alert explores the scope of the potential "unfair contract" and "unconscionable conduct" provisions and the implications for businesses.


There are two key policy drivers behind the Bill:1

  1. To promote more efficient regulation. The Bill aims to achieve this by making New Zealand's consumer laws more principles-based, so that consumers can be broadly aware of their rights and transact with confidence without necessarily knowing the black letter wording of the statutes' prohibitions; and
  2. To harmonise New Zealand's consumer laws with that of Australia, as part of the Single Economic Market ("SEM") objective.

In light of this second objective, the Ministry had recommended to the previous Minister that the Bill introduce "unfair contract" and "unconscionable conduct" provisions into New Zealand's Fair Trading Act to match equivalent provisions in the Australian consumer law regime.2 The previous Minister had rejected that recommendation due to considerable negative feedback from the business community.

Unfair contract terms

An "unfair contract term" in Australia is a term in a standard form consumer contract that causes significant disadvantage to one party (typically the consumer) and is not reasonably necessary for the protection of the other party (typically the supplier). The consumer or the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission ("ACCC") may apply to the court to have unfair contract terms deemed void. There is no other penalty or consequence of a term being found to be unfair.

The rationale is that standard form contracts3 facilitate the incorporation of unfair contract terms because they are presented to consumers on a "take it or leave it" basis and consumers often do not even read the contents, so there is little potential for genuine consent.4

On the other hand, the benefits of such contracts are that consumers and businesses are able to take advantage of lower transaction costs. The efficiency benefits are particularly acute in industries where businesses have thousands or even millions of customers with multiple similar transactions.

The introduction of an uncertain, and emotive, concept such as "unfairness" into all standard form contracts has the potential to result in disadvantages for businesses and consumers alike - parties to standard form contracts will not know whether there are any void terms in their contract until a person seeks to enforce that contract,5 and the costs of such uncertainty will inevitably have to be passed on to consumers.

Despite the Ministry not having specifically identified a need for "unfair contract term" legislation in New Zealand, it recommended the introduction of such legislation on the basis that:

  • Australia had undertaken an extensive process in developing its unfair contract provisions;
  • The evidence was strong that Australian suppliers had been taking advantage of unfair contract terms at the expense of consumers;
  • There is no evidence that consumers in New Zealand are less likely to enter into standard form contracts than consumers in Australia; and
  • In the absence of evidence that New Zealand consumers are in a different position to consumers in Australia, "it is reasonable and efficient to rely on the Australian analysis."

Unconscionable conduct

The Australian Consumer Law specifically prohibits a person in trade, both in business-to-consumer and business-to-business transactions, from engaging in "unconscionable conduct". The remedies available include injunctions, damages and penalties of up to AUD$1.1 million.

The Australian Consumer Law does not provide a definition of "unconscionable conduct", but instead provides a range of factors that the Court may consider when determining whether conduct is unconscionable.6

The list of factors is surprisingly broad and includes: the relative bargaining strength of each party, whether the parties acted in good faith, whether the conduct was consistent with other dealings, prices available elsewhere, and whether the stronger party was willing to negotiate.

The Ministry noted that the term "unconscionable" is uncertain and fact specific, but the Ministry considered that this uncertainty had "been to the benefit of the suppliers in the unsuccessful cases taken by the ACCC."7 An alternative view is that the uncertainty has resulted in the ACCC prosecuting businesses that have complied with the law, causing the erosion of already limited government resources to no particular benefit.

It is also not clear that Australia's new prohibition has significant advantages over the existing doctrine of unconscionability, which has been developed by the Courts over several hundred years and is relatively well understood. The existing doctrine operates in New Zealand "to protect those who enter into bargains when they are under a significant disability or disadvantage," such as ignorance, lack of education, illness, age, mental or physical infirmity, stress or anxiety (and it is not meant to "relieve parties from 'hard' bargains or to save the foolish from their foolishness").8

The new Australian law significantly downplays the needs for a "weaker party" to be in a vulnerable position and opens up all commercial dealings to scrutiny, even between two commercial entities.

Nevertheless, the Ministry's preference was to introduce the Australian "unconscionable conduct" law into New Zealand as its view was that the existing equitable doctrine does not provide an adequate remedy for consumers or small businesses:9

  • as it is only a defence where the "stronger party" seeks to enforce a contract through the Courts and, therefore, consumers and small business cannot themselves invoke the doctrine as a positive remedy to initiate proceedings against the "stronger party";
  • as "it is practically impossible for a small business to claim the benefit of an unconscionability defence" given the factors required to prove a qualifying disadvantage; and
  • as it is "unsatisfactory that there is generally no equivalent remedy available in New Zealand for consumers or small businesses that have the protection of [the unconscionable conduct provisions] in Australia".

Cabinet's view

Numerous submissions, particularly from the business community, opposing these provisions persuaded Cabinet to exclude them.10 The submissions set out the increased costs that such provisions would place on businesses, including:

  • increased uncertainty arising from compromising freedom of contract and the vague and uncertain meaning of "unfair" and "unconscionable"; and
  • increased compliance costs in ensuring that existing practices are compliant (by way of example, the previous Minister noted that the major trading banks would likely have additional upfront compliance costs of NZ$5 million each in ensuring that their existing standard form contracts would comply with such provisions).

The previous Minister ultimately advised Cabinet, in relation to both "unfair contract" and "unconscionable conduct" legislation, that harmonisation with Australia is not sufficient reason for making a change to New Zealand law, and that there would need to be conclusive evidence of a problem to introduce a law change that brings in increased uncertainty and compliance costs. Cabinet agreed with the Minister's views. Instead, the previous Minister directed the Ministry to reconsider a prohibition on "unfair contract terms" in 2014 (to allow time to observe Australia's experience with its equivalent provision enacted in 2010).


Cabinet's decision to exclude prohibitions on "unfair contracts" or "unconscionable conduct" from the Bill represented a principled regulatory approach that is in line with the Government's commitment to only introduce new regulation when it is required, reasonable and robust.11 Given the increased compliance costs and uncertainty that such provisions would place on businesses, it was sensible that these reforms were put on hold until there is greater certainty that the benefits will outweigh the costs. The current Minister's invitation to the Select Committee to consider these provisions creates further uncertainty for the business community, as it indicates the Government may be willing to reconsider its previous policy decisions and may support any recommendations from the Select Committee for their inclusion.

The Select Committee has called for submissions on the Bill, with a closing date for submissions of 29 March 2012. This could be the last opportunity for interested parties to have their views heard on the Bill, and any submitters will face the difficulty of needing to make submissions on the possible "unfair contracts" and "unconscionable conduct" amendments without any legislative drafting in the Bill to comment on. Nor did the Ministry's papers contain suggested drafting on these proposals that would enable targeted submissions - the Ministry's recommendations were at a conceptual policy level only. If the Select Committee is minded to recommend the inclusion of such provisions, it should operate a two-stage process that allows public submissions on the proposed drafting so that the detail of the proposals is subject to robust public scrutiny, which the Select Committee process is intended to provide.

If you are uncertain as to whether or how the Bill, including the "unfair contract" and "unconscionable conduct" proposals, may affect your business, please contact one of the contributors below.


1 Our earlier April 2011 and May 2011 Competition Alerts provide detail on the background of the Bill. See: and
2 The Australian Consumer Law is contained in Schedule 2 to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010.
3 Common in telecommunications, finance, domestic building, gyms, motor vehicles, car rental and utilities contracting situations.
4 See: Ministry of Consumer Affairs. Consumer Law Reform Additional Paper; Unfair Contract Terms (September 2010). Retrieved from:
5 The Ministry of Consumer Affairs recommended that the Disputes Tribunal have jurisdiction to declare that contract terms are unfair.
6 The full list of factors include:

  • the relative strength of the bargaining positions;
  • the imposition of unnecessary conditions;
  • whether a party was able to understand the documents;
  • whether any undue influence, pressure or unfair tactics were used;
  • availability and price comparison of goods elsewhere;
  • whether the conduct was consistent with other dealings;
  • the requirements of an applicable industry code (i.e. the Franchising Code);
  • whether the stronger party failed to disclose any intended future conduct that might have affected the other party's interests;
  • whether the stronger party was willing to negotiate;
  • whether the stronger party had the power to unilaterally vary a term or a condition of a contract between the parties for the supply of goods or services; and
  • the extent to which the parties acted in good faith.

7 Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Consumer Law Reform Additional Paper: Unfair Contract Terms (September 2010), at [26].
8 Gustav & Co Limited v Macfield Limited [2007] NZCA 205, at [30].
9 See: Ministry of Consumer Affairs. Consumer Law Reform Additional Paper: Unconscionability (October 2005). Retrieved from:
10 See: Cabinet Economic Growth and Infrastructure Committee. "Consumer Law Reform" (1 December 2010). Retrieved from:
11 As set out in our April 2011 Alert.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions