PayPal Australia’s Unfair Contract Term: Court Favours Small Businesses

An Australian court has ruled against PayPal’s local entity for using a disadvantageous term in its contracts that was unfair to small businesses. In the ruling, the court declared the unfair terms void from the contract’s start and ordered the payment giant to refrain from applying or enforcing them.

ASIC Fighting for Small Businesses

The ruling came as the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) sued PayPal in September, flagging the unfair terms in the contracts with small businesses. The court also ordered the payments company to pay the regulator’s litigation costs.

“Today’s decision serves as a reminder to all businesses that unfair contract terms contained within standard form contracts with small businesses will not be tolerated and that ASIC will take decisive action where appropriate to protect the rights of consumers and small businesses,” said ASIC’s Deputy Chair, Sarah Court.

One Unfair Term

The Aussie unit of PayPal provided small businesses a time period of 60 days to notify them of any errors or discrepancies in fees that the payment platform was charging. If the 60-day deadline is passed, the small businesses have to accept those fees as accurate.

Now, the court has ruled that the terms were unfair because PayPal allowed small businesses to retain overcharged or incorrectly charged fees if they failed to point out the fees within 60 days of appearing in the account statement. The judge further highlighted that small businesses were not placed in a position to manage the risk of incorrect charging or overcharging.

The unfair term was in PayPal’s contracts between 21 September 2021 and 7 November 2023. The company also acknowledged that the term was unfair and removed it from its contracts on 8 November 2023.

Until 30 June 2023, PayPal had more than 600,000 business accounts. The court also found that PayPal was unaware of any instances where it caused a loss or damage to small businesses by relying on the fee error term. The regulatory investigation also could not find any such case.

An Australian court has ruled against PayPal’s local entity for using a disadvantageous term in its contracts that was unfair to small businesses. In the ruling, the court declared the unfair terms void from the contract’s start and ordered the payment giant to refrain from applying or enforcing them.

ASIC Fighting for Small Businesses

The ruling came as the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) sued PayPal in September, flagging the unfair terms in the contracts with small businesses. The court also ordered the payments company to pay the regulator’s litigation costs.

“Today’s decision serves as a reminder to all businesses that unfair contract terms contained within standard form contracts with small businesses will not be tolerated and that ASIC will take decisive action where appropriate to protect the rights of consumers and small businesses,” said ASIC’s Deputy Chair, Sarah Court.

One Unfair Term

The Aussie unit of PayPal provided small businesses a time period of 60 days to notify them of any errors or discrepancies in fees that the payment platform was charging. If the 60-day deadline is passed, the small businesses have to accept those fees as accurate.

Now, the court has ruled that the terms were unfair because PayPal allowed small businesses to retain overcharged or incorrectly charged fees if they failed to point out the fees within 60 days of appearing in the account statement. The judge further highlighted that small businesses were not placed in a position to manage the risk of incorrect charging or overcharging.

The unfair term was in PayPal’s contracts between 21 September 2021 and 7 November 2023. The company also acknowledged that the term was unfair and removed it from its contracts on 8 November 2023.

Until 30 June 2023, PayPal had more than 600,000 business accounts. The court also found that PayPal was unaware of any instances where it caused a loss or damage to small businesses by relying on the fee error term. The regulatory investigation also could not find any such case.

This post is originally published on FINANCEMAGNATES.

  • Related Posts

    Week in Brief: Kraken to Acquire NinjaTrader, Trustpilot Targets More “Fake” Reviews

    Kraken to Buy NinjaTrader for $1.5B One of the major stories making headlines this week is the US-based crypto exchange Kraken plans to acquire retail futures trading platform NinjaTrader in…

    XTB Broker Platform Keeps 0.5% Fee, Multi-Currency Cards Offer Commission-Free

    FM Home > Retail FX > XTB Broker Platform Keeps 0.5% Fee, Multi-Currency Cards Offer Commission-Free XTB Broker Platform Keeps 0.5% Fee, Multi-Currency Cards Offer Commission-Free 2025-03-21T14:55:24.420+02:00 Friday, 21/03/2025 |…

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You Missed

    What Is the 1% Rule in Forex and Why Do Traders Use It?

    • March 22, 2025
    What Is the 1% Rule in Forex and Why Do Traders Use It?

    What Are Forex Spreads? Fixed vs Variable Explained Simply

    • March 22, 2025
    What Are Forex Spreads? Fixed vs Variable Explained Simply

    🌍💸 FX Market Memos: Last Week’s Drama (Mar 17–21) & This Week’s Dollar Dance (Mar 24–28)! 💃

    • March 22, 2025
    🌍💸 FX Market Memos: Last Week’s Drama (Mar 17–21) & This Week’s Dollar Dance (Mar 24–28)! 💃

    Week in Brief: Kraken to Acquire NinjaTrader, Trustpilot Targets More “Fake” Reviews

    • March 22, 2025
    Week in Brief: Kraken to Acquire NinjaTrader, Trustpilot Targets More “Fake” Reviews

    How are Gold and Forex Correlated

    • March 21, 2025
    How are Gold and Forex Correlated

    What are the best trading routines to stay focused and productive?

    • March 21, 2025
    What are the best trading routines to stay focused and productive?