Commonwealth v Dovoro / Commonwealth v Stonecat [1999] NSWSC 807
The Commonwealth was entitled to verdicts on its rent and mesne profits claims subject to compensatory relief on the cross-claims. Dovoro established misleading or deceptive conduct in relation to the represented exclusivity of food and beverage provision and the represented number of public servants, and those representations caused loss, justifying reduction of rent and damages. Stonecat did not establish the alleged NHS pharmacy representation or reliance on a proper rent representation, but the significant shortfall in represented building occupants justified rent reduction and damages for fitout and lost revenue. Other alleged representations, including as to a conference facility,...
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 05 August 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Common Law Proceedings for Rent, Outgoings and Mesne Profits With Cross Claims Alleging Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Under the Trade Practices Act 1974 / Reasons for Judgment After Hearing
- Outcome
- Verdict for the plaintiff in each matter on the statement of claim subject to cross-claim relief; rent varied under s.87 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 in both actions; damages awarded against the plaintiff in respect of each cross-action; costs and interest reserved.
- Legal Topics
- ['misleading Representations and Reliance' 'lease by Operation of Law' 'variation of Rent Under S.87 of the Trade Practices Act 1974' 'mesne Profits' 'relief on Cross Claims']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Common Law Proceedings for Rent, Outgoings and Mesne Profits With Cross Claims Alleging Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Under the Trade Practices Act 1974 / Reasons for Judgment After Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the Commonwealth made misleading or deceptive representations to Dovoro and Stonecat in connection with the leases of premises in the Jessie Street Centre.' 'Whether Dovoro relied on representations about exclusive food provision, staff numbers, a conference facility, liquor, use of the Atrium, visitor numbers, anticipated meals and rent.' 'Whether Stonecat relied on representations about staff numbers, an NHS dispensing pharmacy and rent.' 'Whether the agreements for lease gave rise to tenancies and rent or mesne profits payable to the Commonwealth.' 'Whether the Court should vary the rents under s.87 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 and award damages under the cross-claims.']
Ratio Decidendi
The Commonwealth was entitled to verdicts on its rent and mesne profits claims subject to compensatory relief on the cross-claims. Dovoro established misleading or deceptive conduct in relation to the represented exclusivity of food and beverage provision and the represented number of public servants, and those representations caused loss, justifying reduction of rent and damages. Stonecat did not establish the alleged NHS pharmacy representation or reliance on a proper rent representation, but the significant shortfall in represented building occupants justified rent reduction and damages for fitout and lost revenue. Other alleged representations, including as to a conference facility,...
Court Disposition
Verdict for the plaintiff in each matter on the statement of claim subject to cross-claim relief; rent varied under s.87 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 in both actions; damages awarded against the plaintiff in respect of each cross-action; costs and interest reserved.
Orders
- ['Subject to the compensatory orders on the cross-action, verdict for the plaintiff in each claim in respect of the amounts set out in the statement of claim.' 'On the Dovoro cross-action, the rent payable under the lease to Dovoro be reduced by the sum of $150,000 per annum.' 'The plaintiff pay damages to Dovoro in...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment