Colin R Price & Associates Pty Ltd v Four Oaks Pty Ltd [2017] FCAFC 75

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Colin R Price & Associates Pty Ltd v Four Oaks Pty Ltd [2017] FCAFC 75 Appeal from: Colin R Price & Associates Pty Ltd v Four Oaks Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 764 Colin R Price & Associates Pty Ltd v Four Oaks Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] FCA 883 Colin R Price & Associates Pty Ltd v Four Oaks Pty Ltd (No 3) [2016] FCA 1031

File number: VID 1021 of 2016

Judges: RARES, MURPHY AND DAVIES JJ

Date of judgment: 12 May 2017

Catchwords: TRADE PRACTICES – unconscionable conduct – director of unit holder under significant financial and emotional pressure – where document in effect required unitholder to give up its right to share in the proceeds of the project to pay for cost overruns – whether finding of unconscionable conduct should have been made – whether a claim of accessorial liability was sufficiently made and pressed – whether appropriate to make findings of accessorial liability on appeal TRADE PRACTICES – misleading or deceptive conduct – alleged representation that builder would be paid the cost of all materials and labour plus a margin of 15% – whether finding of misleading or deceptive conduct should have been made TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES – unit trust for property development project – whether claims against other beneficiaries sufficiently pleaded – whether beneficiary may bring proceedings in its own right – avoiding a multiplicity of proceedings – proper operation of s 22 of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) – whether orders should have been made against all respondents – whether there was sufficient evidence of an amount paid by the trustee – whether any such amount was a proper payment for the purposes of the trust CORPORATIONS – agency – authority of single director to bind a company which has more than one director – whether finding that director did not have implied or ostensible authority should have been made PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – evidence – whether it was appropriate to permit the parties to adduce further evidence after judgment on separate questions