Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Husseini v Girchow Enterprises Pty Ltd [2024] FCAFC 143 Appeal from: Girchow Enterprises Pty Ltd v Ultimate Franchising Group Pty Ltd (Final Hearing) [2023] FCA 420 Girchow Enterprises Pty Ltd v Ultimate Franchising Group Pty Ltd (Final Orders) [2023] FCA 500
File number:
Judgment of: SARAH C DERRINGTON, STEWART AND FEUTRILL JJ
Date of judgment: 12 November 2024
Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – appeal from judgment where appellant found jointly and severally liable to pay damages under s 236 of the Australian Consumer Law – misleading and deceptive conduct under s 18 of the ACL – characterisation of conduct in context – misleading representations in Franchising Code of Conduct disclosure document – effect of disclaimers and qualifications – whether representations objectively misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive – whether representees subjectively misled or induced to enter into transactions – caution in accepting conclusionary and opportunistic evidence as to reliance – causation for the purposes of s 236 of the ACL
Australian Consumer Law ss 4, 4(1), 4(2), 18, 18(1), 236, 236(1), Chs 2, 3, 4 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) ss 51AE, 131, 139B, 139B(2), 139G, 140B, Sch 2; Ptt IVB, XIAA Legislation: Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 51A, 82, 87 Competition and Consumer (Industry Codes – Franchising) Regulations 2014 (Cth) reg 4 Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) ss 18(1), 27, 28, 68 Fair Trading Act 2010 (WA) ss 18, 19
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate