Choosi has been found guilty of misleading consumers about its life and funeral insurance comparison service, in proceedings launched last year by the corporate regulator.

The Federal Court says in a ruling today the comparator website “falsely gave consumers the impression that its comparison service compared policies from a broader range of insurers than it in fact did and, in so doing, [it] conveyed that its comparison service had a quality (in the sense of an attribute, virtue or property) which it did not possess.”

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission had alleged the misconduct occurred between July 1 2019 and November 30 2024.

ASIC said Choosi only compared funeral insurance policies issued by a single insurer, Hannover Life Re of Australasia, from July 2019.

For life insurance, it only compared policies issued by Hannover and a single policy issued by Swiss Re Life & Health Australia between July 2019 and June 30 2023.

From July 1 2023, it only compared life insurance products issued by Hannover.

The commission alleged 4225 Hannover funeral insurance policies and 9478 Hannover life insurance policies were sold through Choosi’s comparison service between July 2019 and November 2024.

ASIC chair Sarah Court says the outcome “sends a strong message that businesses must be transparent about the products they compare and the choices they offer consumers.

“Consumers deserve clear and accurate information about how comparison services operate and the products they do, or do not, compare.

“Businesses cannot create the impression that they offer consumers genuine choice from a range of products when that choice does not exist.”

The Federal Court says the Choosi website and advertising materials were “aimed at the public in a general and random fashion … the number of people who viewed each instance of the alleged contravening conduct is sufficiently large.

“The comparison representation conveyed to consumers that the comparison service would provide a valuable comparison of funeral or life insurance policies; that it could be used by consumers to obtain an overview of the policy options; that it provided a benefit in the form of a comparison of policy options.”

The matter will return to the court for submissions on penalty and other relief sought by ASIC.