D’Cruz v Coutinho [2025] NSWSC 150

D’Cruz v Coutinho [2025] NSWSC 150

The conduct of the first, second, fourth and sixth defendants, through representations made in promotional documents and communications, was misleading or deceptive and caused the plaintiffs to invest and suffer loss. The first defendant (Coutinho) was knowingly involved in the contraventions by the companies. The sixth defendant (Sequeira) was not a mere conduit; his conduct was instrumental in inducing the plaintiffs to invest. Disclaimers were ineffective. Judgment is entered for the plaintiffs for the invested sum plus interest.

Parties
First Plaintiff: Beryl Clotilda D'Cruz; Second Plaintiff: Stanislaus Gregory D'Cruz; First Defendant: Jude Savio Pio Coutinho; Second Defendant: Pinnacle Property Enterprises Pty Ltd t/as Avondale Property Group; Third Defendant: Great Southern Agricultural Holdings Pty Ltd; Fourth Defendant: QC Property Management Pty Ltd; Sixth Defendant: Nigel Christian Savio Sequeira
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Principal Judgment / Final Judgment After Hearing; Default Judgment Against Some Defendants Due to Non Appearance and Non Compliance
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiffs against the first, second, fourth and sixth defendants for $854,010, plus pre-judgment interest.
Legal Topics
Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Australian Consumer Law S 18, Damages for Misrepresentation, Investment Fraud, Persons Involved in Contravention
Equity Consumer Law Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Australian Consumer Law S 18 Damages for Misrepresentation Investment Fraud Persons Involved in Contravention

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Beryl Clotilda D'Cruz

First Plaintiff

Stanislaus Gregory D'Cruz

Second Plaintiff

Jude Savio Pio Coutinho

First Defendant

Pinnacle Property Enterprises Pty Ltd t/as Avondale Property Group

Second Defendant

Great Southern Agricultural Holdings Pty Ltd

Third Defendant

QC Property Management Pty Ltd

Fourth Defendant

Nigel Christian Savio Sequeira

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Principal Judgment / Final Judgment After Hearing; Default Judgment Against Some Defendants Due to Non Appearance and Non Compliance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conduct of the defendants (including representations in investment memoranda and communications) was misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive under s 18(1) of the Australian Consumer Law
  2. 2 Whether Mr Jude Coutinho was a person involved in the contraventions by the second and fourth defendants
  3. 3 Whether Mr Nigel Sequeira engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct or was involved in the contraventions

Ratio Decidendi

The conduct of the first, second, fourth and sixth defendants, through representations made in promotional documents and communications, was misleading or deceptive and caused the plaintiffs to invest and suffer loss. The first defendant (Coutinho) was knowingly involved in the contraventions by the companies. The sixth defendant (Sequeira) was not a mere conduit; his conduct was instrumental in inducing the plaintiffs to invest. Disclaimers were ineffective. Judgment is entered for the plaintiffs for the invested sum plus interest.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiffs against the first, second, fourth and sixth defendants for $854,010, plus pre-judgment interest.

Orders

  • The defences of the first, second and fourth defendants are struck out.
  • Judgment for the plaintiffs against each of the first, second, fourth and sixth defendants for $854,010 together with pre-judgment interest pursuant to section 100 Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW).