Pattinson v Bellwether Agriculture Pty Ltd (In Liq) [2018] NSWSC 38

Pattinson v Bellwether Agriculture Pty Ltd (In Liq) [2018] NSWSC 38

Mr Richardson engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct contrary to s 42 of the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW), inducing the plaintiffs to invest in Bellwether. The plaintiffs' losses are not provable in bankruptcy and so proceedings are not stayed. Damages are to be assessed to restore the plaintiffs to the financial position they would have been in absent the misrepresentations, but not by reference to an unwarranted assumption of reinvestment by the trust. Orders under s 72 for trust compensation are inappropriate where Mr Richardson cannot comply or risk windfall to other beneficiaries. Plaintiffs may recover direct losses proved, subject to further quantification.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Principal Judgment / Post Hearing Judgment With Orders for Further Submissions and Evidence on Quantification of Damages
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs on liability; final quantification and costs reserved for further submissions and evidence.
Legal Topics
['misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'assessment of Damages' 'recovery of Mitigation Costs' 'orders Under Fair Trading Act 1987 (nsw) S 72' 'damages as Unliquidated Claim Not Provable in Bankruptcy']
['trade and Commerce' 'damages' 'bankruptcy'] ['misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'assessment of Damages' 'recovery of Mitigation Costs' 'orders Under Fair Trading Act 1987 (nsw) S 72' 'damages as Unliquidated Claim Not Provable in Bankruptcy']

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

Principal Judgment / Post Hearing Judgment With Orders for Further Submissions and Evidence on Quantification of Damages

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Mr Richardson engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct in contravention of s 42 of the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW)' 'Whether the losses claimed are provable in bankruptcy' 'Basis and assessment for damages recoverable by plaintiffs' 'Whether an order should be made under s 72 of Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) in favour of a discretionary trust' 'Appropriate methodology for calculating damages (quantification and mitigation)']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Richardson engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct contrary to s 42 of the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW), inducing the plaintiffs to invest in Bellwether. The plaintiffs' losses are not provable in bankruptcy and so proceedings are not stayed. Damages are to be assessed to restore the plaintiffs to the financial position they would have been in absent the misrepresentations, but not by reference to an unwarranted assumption of reinvestment by the trust. Orders under s 72 for trust compensation are inappropriate where Mr Richardson cannot comply or risk windfall to other beneficiaries. Plaintiffs may recover direct losses proved, subject to further quantification.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiffs on liability; final quantification and costs reserved for further submissions and evidence.

Orders

  • ['Plaintiffs to provide additional evidence on quantification within 28 days.' "Matter stood over for further submissions on quantification of plaintiffs' loss and costs." 'Plaintiffs to provide copy of judgment to Mr Richardson and his trustee in bankruptcy.']