Gilchrist, T. v A.T.S. Amusements Pty Ltd [1982] FCA 56

Gilchrist, T. v A.T.S. Amusements Pty Ltd [1982] FCA 56

The representations made by the respondents were false and constituted misleading and deceptive conduct under s.52 and s.53 of the Trade Practices Act. Damages must be awarded for the sum paid by the applicant, interest lost, and value of time wasted, less the amounts received, but not for speculative loss of profits under the agreement since those losses were not sufficiently established and the agreement itself did not guarantee specific contractual entitlements.

Parties
Applicant: Terrence Gilchrist; First Respondent: A.T.S. Amusements Pty. Limited formerly Australian Table Soccer Company Pty. Limited; Second Respondent: Frank Yates; Third Respondent: Brian Hunt; Fourth Respondent: Jeff Waller
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 April 1982
Procedural Posture
Application for Damages Under Trade Practices Act / Damages Assessment Following Liability Finding
Outcome
Damages awarded to Applicant, calculation adjourned for precise computation.
Legal Topics
Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, False Advertising, Assessment of Damages, Loss of Profits, Loss of Interest, Value of Time Lost
Trade Practices Misleading and Deceptive Conduct False Advertising Assessment of Damages Loss of Profits Loss of Interest Value of Time Lost

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

Parties

Terrence Gilchrist

Applicant

A.T.S. Amusements Pty. Limited formerly Australian Table Soccer Company Pty. Limited

First Respondent

Frank Yates

Second Respondent

Brian Hunt

Third Respondent

Jeff Waller

Fourth Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Damages Under Trade Practices Act / Damages Assessment Following Liability Finding

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conduct of the first respondent constituted misleading and deceptive conduct under s.52 of the Trade Practices Act
  2. 2 Whether false representations were made as alleged under s.53 of the Act
  3. 3 How damages should be assessed for loss caused by breaches

Ratio Decidendi

The representations made by the respondents were false and constituted misleading and deceptive conduct under s.52 and s.53 of the Trade Practices Act. Damages must be awarded for the sum paid by the applicant, interest lost, and value of time wasted, less the amounts received, but not for speculative loss of profits under the agreement since those losses were not sufficiently established and the agreement itself did not guarantee specific contractual entitlements.

Court Disposition

Damages awarded to Applicant, calculation adjourned for precise computation.

Orders

  • Damages to include $50,000 paid, $10,000 for value of lost time, interest at 12.5% per annum from 1 August 1980 to date, less specified receipts totaling approximately $5700 and $1249, with final calculation to be presented at adjourned hearing.