Banbilla Pty Ltd v Supernational Australia Ltd & Anor [1986] FCA 406

CATCHWORODS

TRADE PRACTICES - misleading conduct - conflicting evidence - standard of proof.

CONTRACT - presumption that formal document contains all the terms.

Trade Practices Act, 1974 ss.52, 75B, 87(2)(c)

Banbilla Pty. Ltd. v. Supernational Australia Limited & Anor. OLD G15 of 1986

PINCUS J. BRISBANE 15 September 1986

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA ) QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY ) QLD G15 of 1986

GENERAL DIVISION )

BETWEEN: BANBILLA PTY. LTD.

Applicant

AND: SUPERNATIONAL AUSTRALIA LIMITED

First Respondent

AND: ROYSTON RUSSELL JAMES

Second Respondent

MINUTES OF ORDER

JUDGE MAKING ORDER: PINCUS J. DATE OF ORDER: 15 SEPTEMBER 1986 WHERE MADE: BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. The respondents pay to the applicant the sum of $20,000.

2. The respondents pay the applicant's costs of and incidental to the proceedings, to be taxed.

3. Leave to amend the cross-claim be refused.

NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALTA )

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY ) QLD G15 of 1986 GENERAL DIVISTON )

BETWEEN: BANBILLA PTY. LTD.

Applicant

AND: SUPEHRNATIONAL AUSTRALIA LIMITED

First Respondent

AND: ROYSTON RUSSELL JAMES

Second Respondent

PINCUS J. 15 SEPTEMBER 1986

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

This is an application under s.52 of the Trade Practices

Act relating to an arrangement by the applicant to take up shares in the first respondent (Supernational). At discussions held for this purpose, the applicant was represented by Mr. William Bassingthwaighte and Mrs. Mary Bassingthwaighte. The pleading alleges, and it is admitted, that the applicant paid $20,009 with a view to taking shares in the first respondent, Supernational. It is said, in the first place, that there was no agreement concluded, and therefore the applicant is entitled to be repaid the $20,000. Alternatively, the pleading alleges that there was