Australian consumer protection laws have expanded beyond consumers. The unfair contract terms (UCT) regime in the Australian Consumer Law now applies to a wide range of standard form contracts with small businesses, and penalties can apply for proposing, using, or relying on unfair terms. Businesses operating in Queensland should treat UCT compliance as an active risk item, not a one-off review.

A term may be unfair if it causes a significant imbalance, is not reasonably necessary to protect legitimate interests, and would cause detriment if relied on. Clauses commonly scrutinised include broad unilateral variation rights, one-sided termination rights, automatic renewals without clear notice, disproportionate indemnities, wide limitation of liability in favour of one party, and sweeping set-off rights.

“Standard form” is assessed by substance, not labels. If one party prepares the contract and the other has limited ability to negotiate, UCT risk increases. Businesses should also assume regulators will look at real-world contracting practices: onboarding, time pressure, and whether alternatives are offered.

A pragmatic approach is to: identify standard templates, map high-risk clauses, document legitimate interests (e.g., credit risk), and redraft clauses to be balanced and transparent. Clear schedules, worked examples (fees, renewals), and mutuality in key rights can materially reduce enforcement and dispute risk.