Mobileciti Pty Limited v Vodafone Pty Limited [2009] NSWSC 899

Mobileciti Pty Limited v Vodafone Pty Limited [2009] NSWSC 899

Mobileciti had made material misrepresentations in its advertisements by conveying to customers that Vodafone offered 'cash back' features in its Super Cap plan, when no such Vodafone offer existed. Vodafone's letter did not constitute misleading or deceptive conduct as the representation in it was true. Look Mobile's termination of the dealership agreement was validly based on reasonable grounds, and there was no sufficient evidence of waiver or election to preclude the exercise of termination rights. The claims against both Vodafone and Look Mobile failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Final Judgment in First Instance Trial
Outcome
Plaintiff's claims dismissed
Legal Topics
['repudiation and Non Performance' 'election and Rescission' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'waiver of Right to Rescind' 'cross Examination' 'consumer Protection' 'advertising and Misrepresentation']
['contracts' 'evidence' 'trade and Commerce'] ['repudiation and Non Performance' 'election and Rescission' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'waiver of Right to Rescind' 'cross Examination' 'consumer Protection' 'advertising and Misrepresentation']

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 / Final Judgment in First Instance Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Vodafone's letter to Look Mobile contained a misleading or deceptive representation within the meaning of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)" "Whether Mobileciti made material misrepresentations about Vodafone's Super Cap plan to customers" "Whether Look Mobile's termination of the dealership agreement with Mobileciti was valid" 'Whether Vodafone breached an implied term not to request termination of the dealership except on reasonable grounds' "Whether there was an election or waiver precluding reliance on Mobileciti's breach"]

Ratio Decidendi

Mobileciti had made material misrepresentations in its advertisements by conveying to customers that Vodafone offered 'cash back' features in its Super Cap plan, when no such Vodafone offer existed. Vodafone's letter did not constitute misleading or deceptive conduct as the representation in it was true. Look Mobile's termination of the dealership agreement was validly based on reasonable grounds, and there was no sufficient evidence of waiver or election to preclude the exercise of termination rights. The claims against both Vodafone and Look Mobile failed.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's claims dismissed

Orders

  • ['Mobileciti’s claims under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and for breach of contract are dismissed.' 'No inquiry to quantify damages is required on these claims.' 'Outstanding questions regarding Transition Payments and set-off between Vodafone and Mobileciti to be referred to an Associate Judge if not...