Pappas, Constantine (by his next friend George Pappas) & Anor v Soulac Pty Ltd & Anor [1983] FCA 292

Pappas, Constantine (by his next friend George Pappas) & Anor v Soulac Pty Ltd & Anor [1983] FCA 292

Although a statement by the respondents' agent that all tenants were 'good tenants' was found to be misleading (as some tenants were in arrears), the applicants did not rely on this or any other representation in entering into the second contract of purchase and thus suffered no compensable loss under the Act.

Parties
Applicants: Constantine Pappas (by his next friend George Pappas) and Panagiota Pappas; Respondents: Soulac Pty. Limited and L.J. Hooker Pty. Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 October 1983
Procedural Posture
Application / Judgment After Final Hearing
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Measure of Damages, Misrepresentation in Sale of Property
Trade Practices Consumer Protection Misleading and Deceptive Conduct Measure of Damages Misrepresentation in Sale of Property

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Constantine Pappas (by his next friend George Pappas) and Panagiota Pappas

Applicants

Soulac Pty. Limited and L.J. Hooker Pty. Limited

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Application / Judgment After Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of s.52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 during the negotiations for sale of a shopping centre
  2. 2 Whether applicants suffered loss as a result of alleged misrepresentations
  3. 3 Proper measure and assessment of damages

Ratio Decidendi

Although a statement by the respondents' agent that all tenants were 'good tenants' was found to be misleading (as some tenants were in arrears), the applicants did not rely on this or any other representation in entering into the second contract of purchase and thus suffered no compensable loss under the Act.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Applicants to pay respondents' costs, to be taxed if not agreed