Como Investments Pty Ltd (In Liq) & Anor v Yenald Nominees Pty Ltd & Anor [1997] FCA 12

Como Investments Pty Ltd (In Liq) & Anor v Yenald Nominees Pty Ltd & Anor [1997] FCA 12

The trial judge was entitled to find that Yenald relied on the misrepresentations as to the quality of the tenant, and that subsequent awareness of only a post-contract rent default did not negate causation or reliance. The evidence supported the finding that the misrepresentations induced Yenald’s entry into the contract and caused loss. The assessment of damages using the judge’s own figure of $100,000 as cost of fit-out was reasonable and supported by evidence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 January 1997
Procedural Posture
Appeal / On Appeal From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'reliance' 'causation' 'damages Assessment']
['trade Practices' 'contract'] ['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'reliance' 'causation' 'damages Assessment']

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

Appeal / On Appeal From a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant’s conduct negatived reliance on misrepresentations under s.52 Trade Practices Act' 'Whether the inference of causation was rebutted by applicant’s conduct or knowledge' 'Approach to assessment of damages for investment property misrepresented as having a strong tenant']

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to find that Yenald relied on the misrepresentations as to the quality of the tenant, and that subsequent awareness of only a post-contract rent default did not negate causation or reliance. The evidence supported the finding that the misrepresentations induced Yenald’s entry into the contract and caused loss. The assessment of damages using the judge’s own figure of $100,000 as cost of fit-out was reasonable and supported by evidence.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed as against the first respondent and also as against the second respondent.' 'The appellants pay the costs of the first respondent and of the second respondent.']