Federal Court rules Coles misled shoppers with fake Down Down discounts
Consensus Summary
The Federal Court ruled on 2026-05-14 that Coles misled Australian shoppers with its 'Down Down' discount campaign, finding that 13 of 14 sample products used misleading 'was/is' pricing. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) alleged Coles briefly inflated prices on 245 common household itemsâholding them at a higher rate for a median of 28 daysâbefore advertising fake discounts. Justice Michael OâBryan agreed the tactics were deceptive, as consumers would not perceive genuine savings when the 'was' price was only in place for a short period. Coles defended the practice, arguing price hikes reflected supplier inflation costs, but the court rejected this, emphasizing the promotional language ('Down Down') implied lasting savings. The case follows a broader ACCC crackdown on supermarket pricing tactics, with a separate lawsuit against Woolworths pending. While all sources confirm the ruling, details vary on the exact duration of price spikes and the judgeâs emphasis on inflation as a mitigating factor.
â Verified by 2+ sources
Key details reported by multiple sources:
- Federal Court Justice Michael OâBryan ruled Coles misled shoppers with its 'Down Down' discount campaign on 2026-05-14
- The ACCC sued Coles over 245 products under the 'Down Down' promotion between February 2022 and May 2023
- Justice OâBryan found 13 of 14 sample products had misleading 'Down Down' tickets because the 'was' price was not held for a reasonable period (e.g., median 28 days before discount)
- Coles argued price increases reflected supplier inflation costs, but the court ruled the short-term spikes before discounts were misleading
- The case was heard in the Federal Court in Melbourne, with the judgment delivered on 2026-05-14
- Coles conceded it planned 'Down Down' prices before raising the 'was' price, but claimed discounts were genuine due to inflation
Points of Difference
Details reported by only one source:
- Coles sold 245 products at a first price for a median of 1 year, then raised to a second price for 28 days, before reducing to a third price equal to or higher than the first
- The ACCC also sued Woolworths separately, with that case heard in Sydney in late April and early May 2026
- Justice OâBryan noted the average shopper would not perceive discounts as genuine if they knew the 'was' price was only in place for 28 days
- The case focused on 14 products, with 13 found misleading; the next court date is June 10, 2026
- The judge ruled price increases were not 'artificially high' but the short-term spikes before discounts were deceptive
- Provided detailed pricing charts for six products (e.g., baby formula at $18 for 794 days, then spiked to $24 for 23 days before 'Down Down' at $24)
- Highlighted Coles shortened the period for price spikes to compete with Woolworths
- Included ACCC legal counsel Garry Richâs quote: 'Why on earth are you telling your customers the price is going down? They're not.'
- Mentioned Coles' 'Locked' campaign as another promotional tactic under scrutiny, with one product cycling between Down Down and Locked at a higher price
Contradictions
Conflicting information between sources:
- The Guardian states Coles raised prices to a 'second price for a median of 28 days' before the 'Down Down' discount, while ABCâs charts show some products had spikes lasting only 23 days (e.g., baby formula) or fluctuating more erratically
- Newscomau claims the judge found price increases reflected 'supplier price changes during high inflation,' but the Guardian adds that Coles had already planned the 'Down Down' price before the spike, weakening the inflation defense
Source Articles
Court rules Coles misled shoppers with its âDown Downâ discount campaign
Landmark finding against supermarket giant after competition watchdog argued discounts did not represent genuine savings Coles misled Australian shoppers with fake discounts on everyday grocery products, the federal court has ruled in a landmark decision for the supermarket industry. Justice Michael OâBryan handed down his judgment on Thursday, delivering a significant blow to Australiaâs second largest supermarket chain, which had argued the discounts represented genuine savings during a period
Coles found to have misled consumers with Down Down price campaign
Supermarket giant Coles has lost a major court case with a judge finding it engaged in âmisleadingâ marketing through its Down Down campaign.
Breaking: Coles found to have misled shoppers in bombshell Federal Court case
Supermarket giant Coles broke consumer law by misleading shoppers on discount prices, a Federal Court judge has found.
These charts show how Coles Down Down pricing patterns duped shoppers
The pricing patterns of these six products show how Coles was found to have misled consumers through its Down Down pricing patterns.