This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/12/thermomix-turf-war-exposed-in-court-case-between-saleswoman-and-maker

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Thermomix turf war exposed in court case between saleswoman and maker Thermomix turf war exposed in court case between saleswoman and maker
(about 1 month later)
A former Thermomix contractor in Perth who tried to sue the business after her boundary was changed, consultants were transferred and she was later dumped, has lost a legal battle against the company.A former Thermomix contractor in Perth who tried to sue the business after her boundary was changed, consultants were transferred and she was later dumped, has lost a legal battle against the company.
Thermomix kitchen machines are sold during in-home demonstrations by consultants, who get a commission. Consultants are independent contractors, rather than employees of Thermomix, and are managed by group leaders who also earn a commission from sales.Thermomix kitchen machines are sold during in-home demonstrations by consultants, who get a commission. Consultants are independent contractors, rather than employees of Thermomix, and are managed by group leaders who also earn a commission from sales.
Elisabeth Higgins joined Thermomix in 2007 and became a group leader in 2008, but was dropped from the role in 2014 with two weeks’ notice and her contract as a consultant was terminated a couple of months later.Elisabeth Higgins joined Thermomix in 2007 and became a group leader in 2008, but was dropped from the role in 2014 with two weeks’ notice and her contract as a consultant was terminated a couple of months later.
Consumer watchdog launches legal action against ThermomixConsumer watchdog launches legal action against Thermomix
She sought damages in the Western Australia district court but on Friday Judge Michael Bowden handed down his decision and sided with Thermomix, with costs to be determined at a later date.She sought damages in the Western Australia district court but on Friday Judge Michael Bowden handed down his decision and sided with Thermomix, with costs to be determined at a later date.
Judge Bowden ruled that Thermomix had not been misleading or deceptive in changing the geographical area and had received consent for the consultant transfers.Judge Bowden ruled that Thermomix had not been misleading or deceptive in changing the geographical area and had received consent for the consultant transfers.
He also found Thermomix was justified in terminating Higgins’s agreement.He also found Thermomix was justified in terminating Higgins’s agreement.
“I find that Thermomix did not engage in any conduct that was not reasonably necessary for the protection of their legitimate interests,” he said.“I find that Thermomix did not engage in any conduct that was not reasonably necessary for the protection of their legitimate interests,” he said.
Judge Bowden also found there was no evidence of Thermomix using unfair tactics or treating Higgins differently to others.Judge Bowden also found there was no evidence of Thermomix using unfair tactics or treating Higgins differently to others.
Higgins declined to comment as she left court.Higgins declined to comment as she left court.
Separately, Thermomix is being taken to court by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) over a faulty seal on one of its models. The ACCC says the company kept selling the TM31 model of its combination food processor and cooker, and tried to silence owners who complained, despite knowing for up to a year about the problem that could cause hot food to shoot out. Dozens of customers reported problems and some received burns that needed hospital treatment. The machine was eventually recalled in October 2014.Separately, Thermomix is being taken to court by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) over a faulty seal on one of its models. The ACCC says the company kept selling the TM31 model of its combination food processor and cooker, and tried to silence owners who complained, despite knowing for up to a year about the problem that could cause hot food to shoot out. Dozens of customers reported problems and some received burns that needed hospital treatment. The machine was eventually recalled in October 2014.
With the Australian Associated PressWith the Australian Associated Press
Law (Australia)Law (Australia)
Western AustraliaWestern Australia
Share on FacebookShare on Facebook
Share on TwitterShare on Twitter
Share via EmailShare via Email
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn
Share on PinterestShare on Pinterest
Share on Google+
Share on WhatsAppShare on WhatsApp
Share on MessengerShare on Messenger
Reuse this contentReuse this content