Raoul Cruz v Future Network (Albury) Pty Ltd & Ors [2013] NSWDC 86

Raoul Cruz v Future Network (Albury) Pty Ltd & Ors [2013] NSWDC 86

The plaintiff established an unpaid contractual debt for the transfer of shares, although the correct unpaid principal was $175,000 after crediting $100,000 and $245,000 against the $520,000 purchase price. The cross-claim failed because the pleaded representations were not established as false representations, Mr Abbott did not rely on them in entering the agreements, no resulting damage was proved, and no special disadvantage or unconscionable conduct was established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Claim for Unpaid Consideration Under Contract for Sale of Shares, With Cross Claim Alleging False Representations and Unconscionable Conduct / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Verdict and judgment for the Plaintiff; Cross-Claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
['sale of Shares' 'false Representation' 'reliance and Inducement' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'debt Recovery' 'cross Claim']
['contract Law' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'equity' 'trade Practices and Fair Trading'] ['sale of Shares' 'false Representation' 'reliance and Inducement' 'unconscionable Conduct' 'debt Recovery' 'cross Claim']

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 Claim for Unpaid Consideration Under Contract for Sale of Shares, With Cross Claim Alleging False Representations and Unconscionable Conduct / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendants were liable to pay the unpaid balance of the purchase price for 80 shares in Dragnet Internet Services Pty Limited' 'Whether the pleaded representations were made' 'Whether any pleaded representations were false' 'Whether Mr Abbott relied on any representations in entering the Company Agreement or the Varied Company Agreement' 'Whether any loss or damage was suffered by reason of the alleged representations' 'Whether the cross-defendant engaged in unconscionable conduct']

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff established an unpaid contractual debt for the transfer of shares, although the correct unpaid principal was $175,000 after crediting $100,000 and $245,000 against the $520,000 purchase price. The cross-claim failed because the pleaded representations were not established as false representations, Mr Abbott did not rely on them in entering the agreements, no resulting damage was proved, and no special disadvantage or unconscionable conduct was established.

Court Disposition

Verdict and judgment for the Plaintiff; Cross-Claim dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Verdict and Judgment for the Plaintiff against the First, Second and Third Defendants in the sum of $175,000, plus interest.' 'The Plaintiff is entitled to interest on the sum of $175,000 from 7 May 2009 until 7 June 2013.' "The Defendants are to pay the Plaintiff's costs of the proceedings." 'The Cross-Claim is...