Belconnen Lakeview Pty Ltd v Lloyd [2021] FCAFC 187

Federal Court of Australia

Belconnen Lakeview Pty Ltd v Lloyd [2021] FCAFC 187 Appeal from: Lloyd v Belconnen Lakeview Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 2177 Lloyd v Belconnen Lakeview Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 698

File number: NSD 651 of 2020

Judgment of: GRIFFITHS, DAVIES AND MOSHINSKY JJ

Date of judgment: 25 October 2021

Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – misleading or deceptive conduct – sale of unexpired term of a lease with respect to a residential unit in a development – where the draft contract was prepared on the basis that the supply would be a taxable supply and subject to the margin scheme for the purposes of GST – where, in fact, the developer had obtained a private binding ruling two years earlier that it could bring itself within an exception to the relevant GST provisions such that the supply would be an input taxed supply – where the primary judge found that the developer had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct – where the primary judge found that the purchaser lost an opportunity of non-negligible value, namely an opportunity to renegotiate the contract between the date of the contract and the date of settlement – where the primary judge awarded damages to the purchaser for loss of that opportunity – whether the primary judge erred in holding that the purchaser lost an opportunity of non-negligible value – whether the primary judge erred in holding that the developer engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct CONSUMER LAW – misleading or deceptive conduct – accessorial liability – where the primary judge dismissed claims that two officers of a company were knowingly involved in contraventions by the company – whether the primary judge erred in so holding RESTITUTION – money had and received – sale of unexpired term of a lease with respect to a residential unit in a development – where the contract was prepared on the basis that the supply would be a taxable supply and subject to the margin scheme for the purposes of GST – where, in fact, the supply was an input taxed supply – where the purchaser brought a claim for money had and received with respect to the component of the purchase price referable to GST on the basis that there was a total failure of a severable part of the consideration – whether there was a total failure of a severable part of the consideration – whether the terms of the contract precluded recovery on the basis of money had and received