Plaintiff v Defendant [2013] VSC 148 | Case summary

Supreme Court of Victoria|2013-04-05|Before: MUKHTAR AsJ

The application be granted.
This proceeding be dismissed.
The plaintiff pay the defendant's costs of the proceeding to be taxed in default of agreement.

[1] See Eileen Webb, "Houses with a history - Disclosure obligations and 'psychologically stigmatised' property" in (2006) 13 Australian Property Law Journal 67, especially at 86 ff.

[2] See Administrative Decisions Tribunal); on appeal in These were proceedings for offences under the legislation affecting agents as well as the Fair Trading legislation. The executrix released the purchasers from the contract.

[3] That is the expression I shall use, as some authors have done, to cover s 52 of the Trade Practices Act and the equivalent provisions of the Fair Trading Act, and now the Australian Consumer Law under the Competition and Consumer Act.

[4] Sargent v ASL Developments [1974] HCA 40; (1974) 131 CLR 634 esp at 642 and 656-8.

[6] [1992] FCA 557; (1992) 39 FCR 31 at 41 (per Gummow J).

[7] For an instructive overview and analysis see Gillies P, "Non-disclosure: Trade Practices Act, s 52" in (2004) 78 ALJ 653. See also Cheshire & Fifoot Law of Contract (10th ed.) at 11.115 ff.

[11] Poseidon Limited v Adelaide Petroleum [1991] FCA 663; (1992) ATPR 41-164 at 40, [227].

[18] FCT v Sara Lee Household & Body Care (Aust) Pty Ltd ( [2000] HCA 35; 2000) 201 CLR 520.

[19] [1949] HCA 1; (1948) 78 CLR 62 at 91. See also Webster v Lampard (1993_)_ [1993] HCA 57; 177 CLR 598 at 602-3.

[20] Behrooz v Sec, DIMIA [2004] HCA 36; (2004) 219 CLR 486 at 517.

[21] British American Tobacco v WA [2003] HCA 47; (2003) 217 CLR 30 at 70-1.

Court (General Civil Procedure) Rules 2005

Plaintiff v Defendant

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Source

Judgment (30 paragraphs)

Parties

Legislation Cited (3)

Cases Cited (10)