The Vales Wine Company Pty Ltd was fined a total of $165,000 for falsely representing the vintage and description of quantities of bulk wine in contravention of the Trade Practices Act.
The former directors of the Vales Wine Company Pty Ltd, Claude Curtis and Michael Von Berg were fined $10,000 each today for aiding and abetting the Vales Wine Company in the misleading and deceptive conduct.
The fines on the company represent the maximum penalty available under the Act at the time of the offence.
Justice OLoughlin had previously convicted The Vales Wine Company of four charges relating to the sales of bulk wines in 1991 to 1992 to a number of Australian wineries. The sales involved volumes of wine of between 30,000 litres and 198,000 litres.
The court found that representations were made to the various wineries that the wines were varietal wines such as shiraz and cabernet sauvignon but that the wines supplied were blends.
Justice OLoughlin said: "The evidence from members of the wine industry made it clear that the offending [conduct] could not be detected by the human senses or by technology. In matters of blends and components, one is wholly dependent upon the integrity of the winemaker... The wine industry is dependent upon the integrity of wine makers and manufacturers. Conduct of the kind engaged in by the company has the potential to cause serious damage to the nations wine industry."
In regard to the directors Justice OLoughlin said: "each of them well knew and understood that he was participating in a fraud".
Justice OLoughlin also ordered that the company pay 35 per cent of the prosecutors costs and the directors pay 10 per cent.
"The fines concerning the company represent the maximums that were available under the law as at the time of the offences," ACCC Chairman, Professor Allan Fels, said today. "Subsequently, the Act was amended taking the maximum fines to $40,000 per offence for individuals and $200,000 for companies.
"They provide further warning, if warning was needed, that the Court views seriously such contraventions, particularly in an industry which is so reliant on honesty in representations.
"The actions of the company placed the reputation of the Australian wine industry at grave risk."
The matter is subject to an appeal due to commence on 11 November 1996.
The former directors of the Vales Wine Company Pty Ltd, Claude Curtis and Michael Von Berg were fined $10,000 each today for aiding and abetting the Vales Wine Company in the misleading and deceptive conduct.
The fines on the company represent the maximum penalty available under the Act at the time of the offence.
Justice OLoughlin had previously convicted The Vales Wine Company of four charges relating to the sales of bulk wines in 1991 to 1992 to a number of Australian wineries. The sales involved volumes of wine of between 30,000 litres and 198,000 litres.
The court found that representations were made to the various wineries that the wines were varietal wines such as shiraz and cabernet sauvignon but that the wines supplied were blends.
Justice OLoughlin said: "The evidence from members of the wine industry made it clear that the offending [conduct] could not be detected by the human senses or by technology. In matters of blends and components, one is wholly dependent upon the integrity of the winemaker... The wine industry is dependent upon the integrity of wine makers and manufacturers. Conduct of the kind engaged in by the company has the potential to cause serious damage to the nations wine industry."
In regard to the directors Justice OLoughlin said: "each of them well knew and understood that he was participating in a fraud".
Justice OLoughlin also ordered that the company pay 35 per cent of the prosecutors costs and the directors pay 10 per cent.
"The fines concerning the company represent the maximums that were available under the law as at the time of the offences," ACCC Chairman, Professor Allan Fels, said today. "Subsequently, the Act was amended taking the maximum fines to $40,000 per offence for individuals and $200,000 for companies.
"They provide further warning, if warning was needed, that the Court views seriously such contraventions, particularly in an industry which is so reliant on honesty in representations.
"The actions of the company placed the reputation of the Australian wine industry at grave risk."
The matter is subject to an appeal due to commence on 11 November 1996.