{"id":"fair-trading-franchising-industry-dispute-resolution-code-regulations-2015","name":"Fair Trading (Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code) Regulations 2015","slug":"fair-trading-franchising-industry-dispute-resolution-code-regulations-2015","collection":"regulation","jurisdiction":"sa","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":235470,"registerId":"sa-fair-trading-franchising-industry-dispute-resolution-code-regulations-2015-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-06","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Fair Trading (Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code) Regulations 2015","content":"South Australia\nFair Trading (Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code) Regulations 2015\nunder the Fair Trading Act 1987\n\nContents\n1\tShort title\n2\tCommencement\n3\tInterpretation\n4\tPrescription of franchising industry and franchising industry participants\n5\tPrescription of code\n6\tContravention of code subject to civil penalty\n7\tFee for mediation under code\nSchedule 1—Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code\n1\tShort title\n2\tInterpretation\n3\tApplication of code\n4\tDispute resolution\nLegislative history\n\n1—Short title\nThese regulations may be cited as the Fair Trading (Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code) Regulations 2015.\n2—Commencement\nThese regulations come into operation on the day on which they are made.\n3—Interpretation\nIn these regulations—\nAct means the Fair Trading Act 1987;\nassociate, for a franchisor, franchise agreement, franchisee and franchisor have the same respective meanings as in the Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes—Franchising) Regulation 2014 of the Commonwealth;\ncivil penalty contravention has the same meaning as in Part 7 Division 3A of the Act;\ncode means the Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code 2015 set out in Schedule 1;\nCommissioner means the Small Business Commissioner.\n4—Prescription of franchising industry and franchising industry participants\nFor the purposes of Part 3A of the Act—\n\t(a)\tfranchising is taken to be an industry; and\n\t(b)\tthe following are taken to be participants in the franchising industry:\n\t(i)\ta franchisor;\n\t(ii)\ta franchisee;\n\t(iii)\tan associate of a franchisor;\n\t(iv)\ta person carrying on a business having a connection to a franchisor for a purpose relating to a franchise agreement;\n\t(v)\ta person carrying on a business having a connection to a franchisee;\n\t(vi)\ta person who in the course of a business supplies goods or services to a franchisee or to a franchisor in connection with a franchise agreement.\n5—Prescription of code\n\t(1)\tThe code is prescribed as an industry code for the purposes of Part 3A of the Act.\n\t(2)\tThe Small Business Commissioner is responsible for the administration of the code and for the administration of Part 3A of the Act in relation to the code.\n6—Contravention of code subject to civil penalty\n\t(1)\tA contravention of section 28E of the Act constituted of a contravention of the code is to be subject to a civil penalty under Part 7 Division 3A of the Act.\n\t(2)\tThe expiation fee for an alleged civil penalty contravention involving an alleged contravention or attempted contravention of the code is—\n\t(a)\tin the case of a body corporate—$4 000; and\n\t(b)\tin the case of a natural person—$500.\n7—Fee for mediation under code\n\t(1)\tIf an authorised officer arranges for mediation of a dispute under the code with the agreement of the parties to the dispute, each of the parties must pay a fee of $195 for each day, or part of a day, on which the mediation occurs.\n\t(2)\tA fee payable by a person under subregulation (1) is recoverable as a debt due to the Crown.\n\t(3)\tThe Commissioner may waive a fee payable by a person under subregulation (1) if satisfied that it is appropriate to do so in a particular case.\nSchedule 1—Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code\n1—Short title\nThis code may be cited as the Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code 2015.\n2—Interpretation\nIn this code—\nalternative dispute resolution procedure does not include arbitration;\nparticipant in the franchising industry means a person taken to be a participant in the franchising industry for the purposes of Part 3A of the Act.\nNote—\nSee regulation 4(b).\n3—Application of code\nThis code applies to—\n\t(a)\ta dispute between a franchisor, or an associate of a franchisor, and a franchisee in relation to a matter arising under a franchising agreement to which the franchisor and franchisee are parties; or\n\t(b)\ta dispute between a participant in the franchising industry and—\n\t(i)\tanother participant in the franchising industry; or\n\t(ii)\ta person to whom goods or services are or may be supplied by the participant,\nin connection with the acquisition or supply, or the potential acquisition or supply, of goods or services for a purpose relating to a business carried on under a franchise agreement.\n4—Dispute resolution\n\t(1)\tIf the Commissioner is satisfied, on written application by a party to a dispute to which this code applies—\n\t(a)\tthat the party has made a reasonable attempt to resolve the dispute; and\n\t(b)\tthat the subject matter of the dispute is not frivolous or vexatious,\nan authorised officer may notify the parties to the dispute in writing that he or she is commencing an alternative dispute resolution procedure in relation to the dispute in accordance with this code.\n\t(2)\tIf an alternative dispute resolution procedure is commenced under this code, a party to the dispute, or another person authorised in writing to attend or participate in the procedure on his or her behalf, must attend or otherwise participate in the procedure, as required by the authorised officer.\n\t(3)\tA person participating in an alternative dispute resolution procedure—\n\t(a)\tmust act reasonably, fairly, honestly and cooperatively; and\n\t(b)\tmust not mislead, harass, intimidate or oppress another party to the dispute.\n\t(4)\tA person participating in an alternative dispute resolution procedure must comply with any reasonable request made by the authorised officer in connection with the officer's attempt to assist the parties in the resolution of the dispute, including, without limitation, a request to do 1 or more of the following:\n\t(a)\texchange information relevant to the dispute with the other party;\n\t(b)\tanswer questions in respect of matters relevant to the dispute;\n\t(c)\tattend meetings;\n\t(d)\tparticipate in mediation or another form of alternative dispute resolution.\n\t(5)\tAn authorised officer conducting an alternative dispute resolution procedure may request that a person participating in the procedure be a person who is authorised to resolve the dispute.\n\t(6)\tA request made by an authorised officer under subclause (4) or (5) must be complied with as soon as reasonably practicable, and, in any event, in the case of a written request, within 14 days of the date of the request or such longer period as is allowed by the authorised officer.\n\t(7)\tThe authorised officer conducting an alternative dispute resolution procedure may, for the purposes of attempting to resolve the dispute—\n\t(a)\trefer the dispute to mediation; or\n\t(b)\tafter consultation with the parties—appoint a person able to provide expert advice on matters relevant to the dispute to assist the officer.\n\t(8)\tThe parties to a dispute are equally liable for the costs of expert advice provided under subclause (7)(b) unless they agree to a different apportionment of the costs.\n\t(9)\tAn authorised officer may suspend (for a specified time or until further notice) or terminate an alternative dispute resolution procedure if the dispute is the subject of—\n\t(a)\tproceedings before a court or tribunal; or\n\t(b)\tarbitration; or\n\t(c)\tanother alternative dispute resolution procedure.\n\t(10)\tAn authorised officer may terminate an alternative dispute resolution procedure if the officer forms the view that—\n\t(a)\tthere is no reasonable prospect of resolving the dispute; or\n\t(b)\tthe subject matter of the dispute is frivolous or vexatious.\n\t(11)\tFollowing the completion of an alternative dispute resolution procedure, the authorised officer who conducted the procedure must provide the parties with a certificate stating—\n\t(a)\tthe names of the parties; and\n\t(b)\tthe nature of the matters in dispute; and\n\t(c)\tif the procedure has been terminated under subclause (9) or (10)—that the procedure has been terminated without resolution; and\n\t(d)\tif the dispute has been resolved—the terms of the resolution.\n\t(12)\tUnless the authorised officer and the parties otherwise agree in writing, any communication made, or document prepared (including a certificate provided under subclause (11)), in connection with an alternative dispute resolution procedure under this code must be treated as confidential.\n\t(13)\tHowever, a certificate provided under subclause (11) may be produced before a court or tribunal.\nLegislative history\nNotes\n\t•\tFor further information relating to the Act and subordinate legislation made under the Act see the Index of South Australian Statutes or www.legislation.sa.gov.au.\nPrincipal regulations\nYear\nNo\nReference\nCommencement\n2015\n216\nGazette 8.10.2015 p4575 \n8.10.2015: r 2\n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"Scope assessment cannot be determined — the full text of the legislation was not available for review. No comparison between original intent and enacted provisions could be made."},"complexity_factors":["Complexity cannot be meaningfully assessed — the legislative text was not retrievable due to a website error","Score of 2 reflects baseline complexity expected of a state-level regulation implementing a dispute resolution framework","Franchising codes typically involve multi-party relationships and procedural requirements, which carry inherent moderate complexity","South Australian regulations of this type generally cross-reference federal franchising law (e.g. the Commonwealth Franchising Code of Conduct), adding a layer of jurisdictional complexity"],"plain_english_summary":"This South Australian regulation (2015) creates a mandatory dispute-resolution code for franchising, setting rules for how franchisors and franchisees must handle disagreements. It regulates interactions between franchisees, franchisors and dispute-resolution practitioners to provide an expected process for resolving complaints.\n\nIt matters to anyone involved in franchise relationships in South Australia because it standardises how franchise disputes are dealt with and who must follow the code."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The legislation remains tightly focused on its original purpose: establishing a dispute resolution framework for the franchising industry. The scope covers franchisors, franchisees, and connected businesses as originally intended, with no evidence of scope creep into unrelated industries or matters."},"complexity_factors":["Short length (approximately 2,500 words across regulations and code)","Only 6 defined terms in the main regulations, 2 in the code","Minimal cross-referencing — primarily references to the Fair Trading Act 1987 (SA) and Commonwealth franchising regulations for definitions","Straightforward conditional structure: application criteria → process → powers → termination → certificate","Single layer of exceptions (confidentiality rule with one exception for court use)","No nested definitions or recursive cross-references","Clear, sequential numbering without complex sub-sub-clauses"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this legislation does:**\n\nThese regulations create a formal process for resolving disputes in the franchising industry in South Australia. They establish the **Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code**, which provides a structured way for franchisors (the companies that own the brand) and franchisees (the people who run individual outlets) to sort out their disagreements without immediately going to court.\n\n**Who it affects:**\n\n- **Franchisors** and their associates (people connected to the franchisor)\n- **Franchisees** (business owners operating under a franchise agreement)\n- **Suppliers** and other businesses connected to franchise operations\n- The **Small Business Commissioner**, who administers the code\n\n**How it works:**\n\n- If parties have a dispute and can't resolve it themselves, they can apply to the Commissioner for help\n- An authorised officer can start an **alternative dispute resolution procedure** — this means mediation or other facilitated discussions, but **not** arbitration (a more formal, binding process)\n- Parties must:\n  - Participate in good faith (act reasonably, fairly, honestly and cooperatively)\n  - Not bully or mislead each other\n  - Share relevant information and attend meetings when asked\n  - Respond to requests within 14 days\n- The officer can:\n  - Appoint expert advisers (costs split equally between parties)\n  - Suspend or end the process if the matter goes to court or seems hopeless\n  - Issue a certificate at the end showing what happened\n- **Confidentiality** is protected — what happens in mediation generally stays private, though the final certificate can be used in court if needed\n\n**Penalties and fees:**\n\n- Breaking the code can result in **civil penalties** — fines of up to $4,000 for companies or $500 for individuals if paid quickly (expiation fees)\n- Mediation costs **$195 per day per party**, though the Commissioner can waive this for people who can't afford it\n\n**Why it matters:**\n\nFranchise disputes can be expensive and destructive for small business owners. This code provides a **cheaper, faster alternative to court** while requiring everyone to behave reasonably. It gives the Small Business Commissioner teeth to enforce good behaviour during negotiations, protecting franchisees from being bullied by larger franchisors."},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"Unauthenticated. Configure AI_GATEWAY_API_KEY or use a provider module. Learn more: https://ai-sdk.dev/unauthenticated-ai-gateway","source":"analysis-cron"},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The regulations prescribe franchising as an industry for Part 3A and prescribe a specific dispute resolution code; they do not, on their face, expand or narrow the statutory scope beyond what Part 3A contemplates. They implement administrative procedures, fees, participation obligations and penalties (see regs 4–7 and Schedule 1 cl 3–4) but do not amend the underlying Act's substantive reach."},"complexity_factors":["Cross-reference to the Fair Trading Act 1987 Part 3A and to Commonwealth franchising definitions (regs 3, 4 and note in Schedule 1 cl 2) increases legal interdependence and requires reading multiple instruments.","Delegation of administration and discretionary powers to the Small Business Commissioner (reg 5(2); Sch 1 cl 4(1), (10)) creates implementation discretion affecting outcomes.","Mandatory participation and procedural obligations in ADR (Sch 1 cl 4(2)–(6)) impose compliance burdens on parties and require timely responses (14‑day written request timeframe in Sch 1 cl 4(6)).","Enforcement via civil penalty regime and set expiation fees ties code contraventions to monetary sanctions (reg 6(1)–(2)); enforcement mechanics follow Part 7 Div 3A of the Act.","Fee structure: mediation fee per party per day recoverable as a debt to the Crown, with an express power to waive (reg 7(1)–(3)); cost allocation for expert advice is equally liable unless otherwise agreed (Sch 1 cl 4(7)–(8)).","Confidentiality rule with an express exception for production of the ADR certificate in court or tribunal proceedings (Sch 1 cl 4(12)–(13)), affecting evidentiary strategy.","Ability for authorised officers to suspend or terminate ADR where parallel proceedings exist (Sch 1 cl 4(9)–(10)) creates interaction effects with court, tribunal and arbitration processes."],"plain_english_summary":"These regulations prescribe a Franchising Industry Dispute Resolution Code and declare franchising to be an industry for the purposes of Part 3A of the Fair Trading Act. The Small Business Commissioner administers the code, can start alternative dispute resolution (ADR), and may waive mediation fees. Parties to covered franchise disputes must participate in ADR when commenced, share costs for expert advice, and each pay $195 per mediation day (subject to waiver); breaches of the code can attract civil penalties ($4,000 corporate; $500 natural person)."},"issue_detection":{"absurdities":[],"contradictions":[]}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/fair-trading-franchising-industry-dispute-resolution-code-regulations-2015","history":"/api/acts/fair-trading-franchising-industry-dispute-resolution-code-regulations-2015/history","analysis":"/api/acts/fair-trading-franchising-industry-dispute-resolution-code-regulations-2015/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/fair-trading-franchising-industry-dispute-resolution-code-regulations-2015/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/fair-trading-franchising-industry-dispute-resolution-code-regulations-2015/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/fair-trading-franchising-industry-dispute-resolution-code-regulations-2015/documents"}}