Duxbury v Pierce [2010] FCA 203

Duxbury v Pierce [2010] FCA 203

Respondents are jointly and severally liable for losses suffered by applicants as a result of misleading or deceptive conduct in breach of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), no apportionment applies as respondents intended the loss, and damages plus interest at commercial rate are ordered accordingly.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment on Quantification of Damages Following Liability Determination
Outcome
Application for assessment of damages allowed; respondents jointly and severally liable for losses; orders for payment and interest made.
Legal Topics
['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'apportionment of Damages' 'interest on Damages']
['trade Practices' 'commercial Law'] ['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'apportionment of Damages' 'interest on Damages']

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

Civil / Judgment on Quantification of Damages Following Liability Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Quantum of loss or damage recoverable for breach of s 52 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)' 'Whether loss should be apportioned between respondents under Part VIA of Trade Practices Act' 'Entitlement to interest on damages']

Ratio Decidendi

Respondents are jointly and severally liable for losses suffered by applicants as a result of misleading or deceptive conduct in breach of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), no apportionment applies as respondents intended the loss, and damages plus interest at commercial rate are ordered accordingly.

Court Disposition

Application for assessment of damages allowed; respondents jointly and severally liable for losses; orders for payment and interest made.

Orders

  • ['Respondents to pay first applicant $217,048.30' 'Respondents to pay sixth applicant $293,232.72' 'First respondent to pay second applicant $195,498.00' 'Second respondent to pay second applicant $55,498.00' 'First respondent to pay third, fourth and fifth applicants $281,491.00' 'Second respondent to pay third,...