Dennison, E. & Anor v. Ace Shohin (Australia) Pty Ltd & Ors [1987] FCA 373

Dennison, E. & Anor v. Ace Shohin (Australia) Pty Ltd & Ors [1987] FCA 373

Ace Shohin, through Mr Tan and Mr Hughes, made false, misleading and deceptive representations to Mrs Dennison concerning the risk of commodity futures trading, impending Sydney Futures Exchange membership, the nature and effect of documents, and the need for payments said to meet margin calls. Those representations induced Mrs Dennison to pay $77,691 to Ace Shohin and caused that loss. David Hughes was knowingly concerned in the contraventions relating to the $19,711 and $35,000 payments, because he was aware the representations about margin calls were false, misleading and deceptive. Ace Shohin was liable to Mrs Dennison for $77,691, and Mr Hughes was liable for $54,711, with interest....

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 July 1987
Procedural Posture
Trade Practices Act Proceedings Alleging Misleading and Deceptive Conduct in Commodities Futures Trading / Reasons for Judgment After Hearing; Matter Adjourned for Short Minutes of Order
Outcome
Mrs Dennison succeeded against Ace Shohin for $77,691 and against David Hughes for $54,711, with interest to be calculated; Mr Hughes succeeded on his cross-claim for contribution or indemnity against Ace Shohin. The matter was adjourned for short minutes of order.
Legal Topics
['misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'involvement in Contraventions' 'damages' 'interest' 'indemnity or Contribution']
['trade Practices' 'consumer Protection' 'commodity Futures Trading'] ['misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'involvement in Contraventions' 'damages' 'interest' 'indemnity or Contribution']

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

Trade Practices Act Proceedings Alleging Misleading and Deceptive Conduct in Commodities Futures Trading / Reasons for Judgment After Hearing; Matter Adjourned for Short Minutes of Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Ace Shohin's conduct in commodities futures trading constituted misleading and deceptive conduct within s. 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974." "Whether David Hughes was involved in Ace Shohin's contraventions within s. 75B of the Trade Practices Act 1974." 'Whether Mrs Dennison suffered recoverable loss from the representations made by Ace Shohin and David Hughes.' 'Whether interest should be awarded under s. 51A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976.' 'Whether David Hughes was entitled to contribution or indemnity from Ace Shohin on his cross-claim.']

Ratio Decidendi

Ace Shohin, through Mr Tan and Mr Hughes, made false, misleading and deceptive representations to Mrs Dennison concerning the risk of commodity futures trading, impending Sydney Futures Exchange membership, the nature and effect of documents, and the need for payments said to meet margin calls. Those representations induced Mrs Dennison to pay $77,691 to Ace Shohin and caused that loss. David Hughes was knowingly concerned in the contraventions relating to the $19,711 and $35,000 payments, because he was aware the representations about margin calls were false, misleading and deceptive. Ace Shohin was liable to Mrs Dennison for $77,691, and Mr Hughes was liable for $54,711, with interest....

Court Disposition

Mrs Dennison succeeded against Ace Shohin for $77,691 and against David Hughes for $54,711, with interest to be calculated; Mr Hughes succeeded on his cross-claim for contribution or indemnity against Ace Shohin. The matter was adjourned for short minutes of order.

Orders

  • ['The matter be adjourned to a date to be fixed.' 'The applicants bring in short minutes of orders on that date to give effect to this judgment.']