Invast Financial Services Pty Ltd v Pseven International DWC LLC [2022] FCA 861

Invast Financial Services Pty Ltd v Pseven International DWC LLC [2022] FCA 861

The second respondent, as the controlling mind of the first respondent, made false representations that funds would be sent and had been sent to the applicant, and knew these representations were false. This conduct occurred in trade or commerce and was misleading or deceptive, in contravention of s 18(1) of the ACL. The applicant suffered loss as a result of relying on these representations. The second respondent was knowingly involved in the first respondent's contraventions. The applicant is entitled to summary judgment for damages to be assessed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Corporations Law and Consumer Protection Claim (civil Proceedings) / Summary Judgment Application (with Alternative Default Judgment)
Outcome
Summary judgment for the applicant against the second respondent; damages, interest, and costs referred to a Registrar for inquiry and report.
Legal Topics
['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'contracts for Differences (cfds)' 'damages' 'summary Judgment' 'accessory Liability']
['corporations' 'consumer Law' 'practice and Procedure'] ['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'contracts for Differences (cfds)' 'damages' 'summary Judgment' 'accessory Liability']

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

Corporations Law and Consumer Protection Claim (civil Proceedings) / Summary Judgment Application (with Alternative Default Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether first and second respondents engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct contrary to s 18(1) of the Australian Consumer Law and s 12DA(1) of the ASIC Act' 'Whether the conduct caused loss to the applicant' 'Whether the second respondent is liable as an accessory']

Ratio Decidendi

The second respondent, as the controlling mind of the first respondent, made false representations that funds would be sent and had been sent to the applicant, and knew these representations were false. This conduct occurred in trade or commerce and was misleading or deceptive, in contravention of s 18(1) of the ACL. The applicant suffered loss as a result of relying on these representations. The second respondent was knowingly involved in the first respondent's contraventions. The applicant is entitled to summary judgment for damages to be assessed.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for the applicant against the second respondent; damages, interest, and costs referred to a Registrar for inquiry and report.

Orders

  • ['Inquiry and report by a Registrar as referee on: the amount of damages to which the applicant is entitled against the second respondent; the interest to which the applicant is entitled on such damages; the costs to which the applicant is entitled on a lump sum basis.' 'The inquiry may be conducted as the referee...