Title: Analysis of Potential Breaches of Australian Consumer Law and Negligence Claim in the Case of Lee's Bookkeeping Business

Introduction: This report examines the actions of Lee, who has recently established an online bookkeeping business called 'Numerical Navigators.' The report analyzes whether Lee has breached any provisions of Schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), also known as the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), and explores the potential for a negligence claim against Lee for incorrect advice provided to her client, Tao.

I. Breaches of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL):

Misleading or Deceptive Conduct: Lee's adoption of the slogan "Brisbane's Best Option for your Book-keeping Needs Certified Results!" may potentially mislead consumers into thinking that she is a certified practicing accountant (CPA). This could be a breach of Section 18 of the ACL, which prohibits engaging in conduct that is misleading or deceptive.

False or Misleading Representations: Lee's website and Facebook page list her credentials as a Bachelor of Business (Accounting) degree and six years of experience working for an accounting firm. However, she does not mention her ongoing CPA studies. This omission may constitute a false or misleading representation about her qualifications and could be a breach of Section 29 of the ACL.

Misuse of Testimonials: Lee's decision to leave favorable testimonials from friends who are not actual customers on her Facebook page may be considered misleading conduct. This could breach the ACL, as it misrepresents the level of customer satisfaction and the quality of her services.

Likelihood of Successful Breach Arguments: The likelihood of successful breach arguments will depend on the specific evidence and circumstances presented. While Lee may argue that her intentions were not to mislead or deceive, the focus of the law is on the impact of the conduct on consumers. The testimonials and slogan used by Lee could potentially be seen as misleading or deceptive, and her failure to disclose her ongoing CPA studies may be viewed as a false or misleading representation.

II. Negligence Claim:

Duty of Care: Lee, as a bookkeeper providing advice on minimizing tax requirements, owes a duty of care to Tao.

Breach of Duty: Lee's failure to identify that Tao's business was set up through a family trust and subsequently providing incorrect advice may be seen as a breach of her duty of care.

Causation and Damage: Tao can argue that he suffered financial harm, including a large tax bill and penalties, as a direct consequence of Lee's incorrect advice.

Defenses Available to Lee: Lee may raise defenses, such as reasonable care, by demonstrating that she conducted research before providing advice. However, given the severity of the consequences and the critical nature of the advice sought, this defense may not be strong.

Conclusion: Lee's actions in setting up her business and online presence raise concerns regarding potential breaches of the Australian Consumer Law. The use of misleading or deceptive conduct, false or misleading representations, and the misuse of testimonials could expose Lee to liability under the ACL. Additionally, Tao may have a potential claim in negligence against Lee for the incorrect advice she provided. While Lee may have defenses available, the success of these defenses would depend on the specific evidence and circumstances presented.

Please note that this analysis is based on the information provided and does not constitute legal advice. It is recommended to consult with a legal professional for specific guidance on this matter.

RODUCE A REORT