HM&O Investments v Ingram [2012] NSWSC 958

HM&O Investments v Ingram [2012] NSWSC 958

Representations regarding compliance with Australian Standard AS 4685.1 were made and were materially misleading in respect of seven products, but plaintiffs failed to prove they suffered any loss 'by' that conduct except for reasonable costs incurred in investigating and rectifying non-compliance; damages are limited to $10,000 inclusive of interest.

Parties
First Plaintiff: H M & O Investments Pty Limited; Second Plaintiff: Teach & Play Pty Limited; First Defendant: Bradley Phillip Ingram; Second Defendant: Glenda Louise Ingram
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Commercial Proceeding (equity Division) / Final Judgment
Outcome
Judgment for plaintiffs against defendants for $10,000.00 inclusive of interest. Costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Compliance With Safety Standards, Calculation of Damages, Reliance, Causation
Trade Practices Damages Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Compliance With Safety Standards Calculation of Damages Reliance Causation

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H M & O Investments Pty Limited

First Plaintiff

Teach & Play Pty Limited

Second Plaintiff

Bradley Phillip Ingram

First Defendant

Glenda Louise Ingram

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Proceeding (equity Division) / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants represented playground equipment compliance with safety standards
  2. 2 Whether the representations were misleading or deceptive
  3. 3 Whether plaintiffs relied upon the conduct or representations

Ratio Decidendi

Representations regarding compliance with Australian Standard AS 4685.1 were made and were materially misleading in respect of seven products, but plaintiffs failed to prove they suffered any loss 'by' that conduct except for reasonable costs incurred in investigating and rectifying non-compliance; damages are limited to $10,000 inclusive of interest.

Court Disposition

Judgment for plaintiffs against defendants for $10,000.00 inclusive of interest. Costs reserved.

Orders

  • Direct entry of judgment for the plaintiffs against the defendants in the sum of $10,000.00 inclusive of interest; judgment to take effect on 20 September 2012.
  • Reserve the question of costs.