Stock Markets February 16, 2026

Exxon Mobil’s Australian Arm Hit with A$16 Million Penalty for Misleading Fuel Claims

Federal Court finds Mobil Oil Australia promoted additive benefits for Mobil Synergy Fuel that were not present at nine Queensland sites

By Caleb Monroe XOM
Exxon Mobil’s Australian Arm Hit with A$16 Million Penalty for Misleading Fuel Claims
XOM

Mobil Oil Australia has been ordered to pay A$16 million (US$11.3 million) after admitting to advertising Mobil Synergy Fuel as containing additives and offering engine benefits when the product supplied at nine Queensland petrol stations was the same or substantially similar to unadditised fuel at other retailers. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission said the conduct took place between August 2020 and July 2024 and breached Australian consumer law.

Key Points

  • Mobil Oil Australia admitted to making misleading claims about Mobil Synergy Fuel between August 2020 and July 2024.
  • The Federal Court imposed a A$16 million (US$11.3 million) fine after the ACCC brought the case, citing breaches of Australian consumer law.
  • Misleading signage and branding at nine Mobil petrol stations in north and central Queensland promoted additive-related benefits for fuel that was the same or substantially similar to unadditised fuel at other retail sites.

Federal Court action has resulted in a A$16 million (US$11.3 million) fine for Mobil Oil Australia over promotional claims about its Mobil Synergy Fuel, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission said Tuesday. The regulator says the company admitted that marketing at a number of petrol stations in Queensland conveyed that the fuel contained specific additives and benefits when it did not.

Mobil Oil Australia, which supplies petroleum, diesel and other fuel products to retailers around the country, acknowledged that between August 2020 and July 2024 it made false claims about the composition and added advantages of its Mobil Synergy Fuel. The ACCC said the advertising and branding at the affected outlets gave the impression of a different or enhanced fuel product.

The ACCC's statement identified nine Mobil service stations in north and central Queensland where the misleading conduct took place: Aitkenvale, Barcaldine, Berserker, Biloela, Guthalungra, Proserpine, Rasmussen, Rural View and Yeppoon. According to the regulator, the fuel supplied to these retail sites was the same, or substantially similar, to unadditised fuel available at non-Mobil retailers.

Signage and brand messaging promoting the supposed qualities of Mobil Synergy Fuel were the means by which consumers were presented with the claims the ACCC challenged. The regulator said it was likely that some motorists filled up at these stations under the belief they were purchasing a fuel with distinct qualities that would provide particular benefits for their car engines.

"We considered it very likely that some people chose to fill up at these petrol stations because they thought they were getting a different quality of petrol with particular benefits for their car engine," ACCC Deputy Chair Mick Keogh said.

The ACCC took Mobil Oil Australia to court in 2024 over the allegations, and the regulator said the company's admitted conduct breached Australian consumer law. The penalty imposed by the Federal Court follows the company's admission and the regulator's legal action earlier in the year.


The case centers on promotional claims and consumer protection rather than differences in the physical composition of fuel sold at the identified Mobil sites versus competitor sites. The regulator's findings focus on the representation of additives and associated benefits rather than on other aspects of the company's broader supply operations or product lines.

No further corrective actions or remedies beyond the admitted conduct and the court-imposed penalty are detailed in the ACCC announcement. The limited scope of the published information leaves open questions about the extent to which similar representations may have occurred elsewhere or how retailers and consumers will respond going forward.

Risks

  • Consumers may have been induced to choose certain petrol stations based on the belief they were purchasing fuel with special additives or engine benefits - a consumer protection concern affecting retail fuel buyers and the fuel retail sector.
  • Regulatory and legal exposure for fuel suppliers and retailers when marketing claims about product composition or performance are not substantiated - a compliance risk in the energy and retail sectors.
  • Limited public detail on whether similar claims occurred beyond the nine named sites creates uncertainty about the broader prevalence of the conduct and potential reputational impact for the brand in Australia.

More from Stock Markets

Indigenous Occupation Halts Operations at Cargill’s Santarem Terminal Feb 21, 2026 Market Turbulence Reinforces Case for Broader Diversification Feb 21, 2026 NYSE Holdings UK Ltd launches unified trading platform to streamline market access Feb 21, 2026 Earnings Drive Weekly Winners and Losers as Buyout Headlines Lift Masimo Feb 21, 2026 Barclays Sees 'Physical AI' Scaling to Hundreds of Billions by 2035 Feb 21, 2026