Truebit Pty Ltd & Ors v Westpac Banking Corp [1997] FCA 1290

Truebit Pty Ltd & Ors v Westpac Banking Corp [1997] FCA 1290

Applicants did not rely on any misleading or deceptive conduct or advice from Westpac in entering the shopping centre transaction; the relationship was at arm's length with independent advice; Westpac did not owe or breach fiduciary or advisory duties; there was no unconscionability, breach of contract, or negligence, and the application fails on all grounds.

Parties
First Applicant: TRUEBIT PTY LIMITED; Second Applicant: EDMUND JOHN CONROY; Third Applicant: JILLIAN CONROY; Respondent: WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 November 1997
Procedural Posture
Commercial/civil Proceeding / First Instance, Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Fiduciary Duty, Unconscionable Conduct, Banker and Customer Relationship, Negligence, Breach of Contract
Trade Practices Equity Contract Torts (negligence) Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Fiduciary Duty Unconscionable Conduct Banker and Customer Relationship +2 more

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TRUEBIT PTY LIMITED

First Applicant

EDMUND JOHN CONROY

Second Applicant

JILLIAN CONROY

Third Applicant

WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial/civil Proceeding / First Instance, Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Westpac engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
  2. 2 Whether Westpac owed or breached a fiduciary duty to the applicants
  3. 3 Whether Westpac engaged in unconscionable conduct under the Trade Practices Act or in equity

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants did not rely on any misleading or deceptive conduct or advice from Westpac in entering the shopping centre transaction; the relationship was at arm's length with independent advice; Westpac did not owe or breach fiduciary or advisory duties; there was no unconscionability, breach of contract, or negligence, and the application fails on all grounds.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • The application be dismissed.