I-Achieve Technology Limited v Sojo (NSW) Pty Limited & Ors [2001] NSWSC 16

I-Achieve Technology Limited v Sojo (NSW) Pty Limited & Ors [2001] NSWSC 16

Although Fisher made the four pleaded representations relied on at trial, and the representations that Satellite had no liability as guarantor, had a few million dollars in the bank, was in a good financial position, and had suffered no adverse financial change were false or lacked a reasonable basis, Sojo and Broster had authorised Fisher to negotiate the sale on their behalf. However, the plaintiff did not prove reliance or inducement. Having regard to Mr Kwong's experience, the available public information, the failure to make basic inquiries, the prior involvement of Mr Lee and Mr Jones, and the circumstances and speed of the purchase, the Court found that it mattered not what Fisher...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Equity Division Civil Proceedings Concerning Share Sale, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Agency, Rescission and Repayment of Purchase Price / Final Judgment After Expedited Hearing
Outcome
Plaintiff's application refused; plaintiff's claims dismissed.
Legal Topics
['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'representations as to Future Matters' 'share Sale Agreement' 'rescission' 'authority of Agent' 'reliance and Inducement' 'causation']
['trade Practices' 'fair Trading' 'agency' 'equity' 'corporations'] ['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'representations as to Future Matters' 'share Sale Agreement' 'rescission' 'authority of Agent' 'reliance and Inducement' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity Division Civil Proceedings Concerning Share Sale, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Agency, Rescission and Repayment of Purchase Price / Final Judgment After Expedited Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether representations made by Fisher about Satellite's financial position, guarantees, cash in bank and adverse financial change were false or misleading or deceptive." 'Whether Sojo and Broster authorised Fisher to negotiate the sale of their Satellite shares and make representations on their behalf.' "Whether the plaintiff relied on Fisher's representations and was induced by them to purchase the shares." 'Whether the share sales should be set aside and the purchase prices repaid.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although Fisher made the four pleaded representations relied on at trial, and the representations that Satellite had no liability as guarantor, had a few million dollars in the bank, was in a good financial position, and had suffered no adverse financial change were false or lacked a reasonable basis, Sojo and Broster had authorised Fisher to negotiate the sale on their behalf. However, the plaintiff did not prove reliance or inducement. Having regard to Mr Kwong's experience, the available public information, the failure to make basic inquiries, the prior involvement of Mr Lee and Mr Jones, and the circumstances and speed of the purchase, the Court found that it mattered not what Fisher...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application refused; plaintiff's claims dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The plaintiff's claims are dismissed." 'The Court will hear argument as to costs if a costs order is unable to be agreed between the parties.']