Australian High Court clears Mitsubishi of misleading conduct after upholding appeal in Mitsubishi Triton fuel consumption label saga

In a judgement handed down by the High Court of Australia this week, Mitsubishi Motors Australia Ltd (MMAL) has been cleared of ‘engaging in misleading conduct’ relating to a fuel consumption label on a Triton ute a dealer sold a customer, who sought compensation as the purchase price of the vehicle.

The Mitsubishi Triton in question was purchased by Zelko Begovic in 2017, with the ute wearing the standard fuel consumption label as required by the law.

Begovic made the case that the label’s claimed 7.6L/100km consumption figure was unachievable when tested independently, and an initial ruling in favour of him has since been overturned by the High Court, which found in favour of MMAL.

Mitsubishi’s appeal to the Supreme Court of Victoria was in regards to whether a manufacturer is required by law to apply a label to a vehicle based on tested dictated by ADR 81/02, and disagreed that the independent findings by Begovic were relevant to the label.

"Mitsubishi Motors Australia strongly disagrees with the findings in a VCAT case with Mr Zelko Begovic that the stated fuel consumption on the label on his 2016 Triton GLS was misleading," the brand said in a statement in 2019. 

"The Tribunal took into account test results provided by the customer of their used vehicle, which was tested to a different methodology to the ADR 81/02 standard outlined on the fuel consumption label.

"In regards to the claim of Mr Begovic in the Tribunal that his fuel consumption figures when he drove the vehicle exceeded the ADR-mandated test figures; Mitsubishi Motors Australia notes that real-world testing is different to laboratory testing.”

The High Court of Australia found Mitsubishi had acted within its requirement to uphold the law.

In a judgement handed down by the High Court of Australia this week, Mitsubishi Motors Australia Ltd (MMAL) has been cleared of ‘engaging in misleading conduct’ relating to a fuel consumption label on a Triton ute a dealer sold a customer, who sought compensation as the purchase price of the vehicle.

“The High Court unanimously held in favour of the appellants on the mandatory conduct ground,” the ruling summary statement reads.

“In circumstances where the appellants were bound, respectively, to apply and to maintain the fuel consumption label on the respondent's vehicle, a label the form and content of which were dictated by ADR 81/02, the appellants did not, by that conduct, breach s 18 of the ACL.”

Mitsubishi Australia has, as expected, welcomed the decision by the High Court as confirmed in a statement provided to CarsGuide by an MMAL spokesperson.

The High Court of Australia found Mitsubishi had acted within its requirement to uphold the law.

“Mitsubishi Motors welcomes the High Court of Australia's judgment,” MMAL said.

“Mitsubishi Motors is committed to compliance with the law and the highest standards of ethical behaviour, and we will continue to do so.”

Similarly, Australia’s automotive industry representative body the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) called the ruling a “victory for common sense”.

According to the statement, FCAI Chief Executive Tony Weber said the clarity the ruling gives the industry is “much-needed”.

“The judgement is a victory for common sense and backs in government-mandated fuel consumption labels,” Mr Weber said.