Olive, N.J. & Anor v Westpac Banking Corporation & Ors [1987] FCA 551

Olive, N.J. & Anor v Westpac Banking Corporation & Ors [1987] FCA 551

The applicants failed to establish that the respondents made the alleged representations, or that any representations made were misleading or deceptive, or induced the applicants' actions. The evidentiary standard was not met, and, where opinions were expressed, there was no evidence they were not honestly held or lacked reasonable basis. No cause of action under the relevant provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 or in negligence was established. Therefore, the application was dismissed.

Parties
Applicant: Neville John Olive; Applicant: Johanna Catherina Olive; First Respondent: Westpac Banking Corporation; Second Respondent: Kevin O'Leary; Third Respondent: Salvatore Sciacca; Third Respondent: Vincenza Sciacca
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 October 1987
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Applications dismissed. Judgment for cross-claimant.
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Negligence—misstatement, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Damages
Trade Practices Contract Law Banking Law Torts Misrepresentation Negligence—misstatement Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Damages

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neville John Olive

Applicant

Johanna Catherina Olive

Applicant

Westpac Banking Corporation

First Respondent

Kevin O'Leary

Second Respondent

Salvatore Sciacca

Third Respondent

Vincenza Sciacca

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents contravened s 52, s 53(e), s 53(g), or s 59(2) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 by making misleading or deceptive representations in connection with the sale and purchase of the leasehold of the Sportsman Hotel;
  2. 2 Whether any negligent misstatement or fraud was committed by any respondent;
  3. 3 Whether the applicants were induced to enter into the lease or suffer loss due to such representations.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to establish that the respondents made the alleged representations, or that any representations made were misleading or deceptive, or induced the applicants' actions. The evidentiary standard was not met, and, where opinions were expressed, there was no evidence they were not honestly held or lacked reasonable basis. No cause of action under the relevant provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 or in negligence was established. Therefore, the application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Applications dismissed. Judgment for cross-claimant.

Orders

  • Applicants' claims against all respondents dismissed with costs to be taxed.
  • On Westpac's cross-claim, judgment against the applicants in the sum of $44,013.40 plus interest from 4 November 1986 at $14.29 per day on the fully drawn advance, and $6.40 per day on the working account until judgment, with costs to be taxed.