Ikin, H. & Ors v. Same & Lamborghini Tractors of Australia Pty Ltd & Anor [1985] FCA 310

Ikin, H. & Ors v. Same & Lamborghini Tractors of Australia Pty Ltd & Anor [1985] FCA 310

Although the respondents' conduct misled or deceived the applicants into believing that forward tractor orders could properly be based on there being no respondent-appointed Ayr distributor, the applicants failed to prove recoverable loss or damage. Any loss from sales after 9 March 1981 was suffered by the company that acquired the business, not by the applicants personally, and the claimed damages were not separate and distinct from the company's loss. Further, on the proper measure of damages under s.82, the applicants did not prove that they were worse off by reason of the misleading conduct because all tractors were sold at a profit and it was not shown that profit on fewer tractors...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 July 1985
Procedural Posture
Application Claiming Damages for Alleged Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Under S.52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 and for Breach of Contract / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'distributorship Agreement' 'exclusive Territory' 'novation' 'measure of Damages' 'separate Corporate Loss']
['trade Practices' 'contract Law' 'damages'] ['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'distributorship Agreement' 'exclusive Territory' 'novation' 'measure of Damages' 'separate Corporate Loss']

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

Application Claiming Damages for Alleged Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Under S.52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 and for Breach of Contract / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondents engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct by leading the applicants to believe that their distributorship extended to the Ayr region without appointment of another distributor.' 'Whether any loss suffered from over-ordering tractors and depressed resale prices was suffered by the applicants or by the company to which they sold the business.' 'Whether the distributorship agreement contained a term giving the applicants exclusive distributor rights in the Ayr region or requiring reasonable notice before appointing another distributor for Ayr.' 'Whether the distributor contract between Same S.p.A. and the applicants was replaced by a contract on the same terms between the applicants and Same Trattori S.p.A.' 'Whether damages under s.82 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 could be assessed by reference to how much better off the applicants would have been if the alleged representation had been true.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the respondents' conduct misled or deceived the applicants into believing that forward tractor orders could properly be based on there being no respondent-appointed Ayr distributor, the applicants failed to prove recoverable loss or damage. Any loss from sales after 9 March 1981 was suffered by the company that acquired the business, not by the applicants personally, and the claimed damages were not separate and distinct from the company's loss. Further, on the proper measure of damages under s.82, the applicants did not prove that they were worse off by reason of the misleading conduct because all tractors were sold at a profit and it was not shown that profit on fewer tractors...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • ['The application be dismissed.' 'The Court will hear the parties on costs.']