Abriel v Australian Guarantee Corporation Ltd [2001] FCA 165

Abriel v Australian Guarantee Corporation Ltd [2001] FCA 165

The appeal fails because procedural fairness was not denied and, even if greater cross-examination of Ms Bennett had occurred, it could not possibly have produced a different result given the trial judge's findings on the evidence and lack of unconscionable conduct or undue influence attributable to the respondents.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['unconscionable Conduct' 'undue Influence' 'procedural Fairness' 'deeds of Release and Settlement']
['contract Law' 'trade Practices'] ['unconscionable Conduct' 'undue Influence' 'procedural Fairness' 'deeds of Release and Settlement']

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 / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether respondents engaged in unconscionable conduct under the general law or s 51AA of the Trade Practices Act 1974.' 'Whether undue influence by Ms Bennett and/or the respondents caused appellants to enter the deed of settlement.' 'Whether procedural fairness was denied by refusal to allow cross-examination under s 38 Evidence Act 1995.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal fails because procedural fairness was not denied and, even if greater cross-examination of Ms Bennett had occurred, it could not possibly have produced a different result given the trial judge's findings on the evidence and lack of unconscionable conduct or undue influence attributable to the respondents.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.' "The appellants pay the respondents' costs of the appeal."]