In the matter of Atlas Advisors Australia Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 870

In the matter of Atlas Advisors Australia Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 870

The Court quantifies damages in a 'no transaction' case as the principal invested by the plaintiffs, less returns actually received over time, with interest awarded only on the net amount; costs are apportioned and limited to the successful claims for misleading and deceptive conduct; a declaration of contravention of s 1041H(1) is unnecessary due to lack of practical utility; compensation is conditioned on the redemption of investment units to avoid plaintiffs retaining benefit while receiving compensation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Corporations (misleading/deceptive Conduct, Damages, Costs) / Post Trial – Orders and Costs (following Principal Judgment)
Outcome
First and Third Plaintiffs partially succeed against First Defendant on narrow misleading and deceptive conduct grounds; Second Plaintiff and Plaintiffs' claim against Second Defendant dismissed; damages and interest awarded to First and Third Plaintiffs, limited costs orders made, with compensation conditional on...
Legal Topics
['financial Services' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'damages' 'costs' 'party/party Costs' 'general Rule That Costs Follow the Event' 'discretion in Costs Orders']
['corporations Law' 'equity' 'civil Procedure'] ['financial Services' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'damages' 'costs' 'party/party Costs' 'general Rule That Costs Follow the Event' 'discretion in Costs Orders']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Corporations (misleading/deceptive Conduct, Damages, Costs) / Post Trial – Orders and Costs (following Principal Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Should a declaration of contravention of s 1041H(1) of Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) be made?' "How should damages be quantified in a 'no transaction' case involving investment returns?" 'What costs orders are appropriate where plaintiffs succeeded on narrow grounds and failed on substantial claims?' 'Is it appropriate to impose conditions requiring redemption of investment units as part of compensatory orders?']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court quantifies damages in a 'no transaction' case as the principal invested by the plaintiffs, less returns actually received over time, with interest awarded only on the net amount; costs are apportioned and limited to the successful claims for misleading and deceptive conduct; a declaration of contravention of s 1041H(1) is unnecessary due to lack of practical utility; compensation is conditioned on the redemption of investment units to avoid plaintiffs retaining benefit while receiving compensation.

Court Disposition

First and Third Plaintiffs partially succeed against First Defendant on narrow misleading and deceptive conduct grounds; Second Plaintiff and Plaintiffs' claim against Second Defendant dismissed; damages and interest awarded to First and Third Plaintiffs, limited costs orders made, with compensation conditional on...

Orders

  • ['Judgment for First Plaintiff against First Defendant for $2,061,925.42, subject to condition of redemption of units by Plaintiff at time of payment.' 'Judgment for Third Plaintiff against First Defendant for $824,770.17, subject to condition of redemption of units by Plaintiff at time of payment.' "Plaintiffs'...