Federal Court of Australia
meat gt
at =
Jeo
wet ae
iy
aA
abet ae'
4 xm,
a
gets
"yee ets ge Bet
eg ts ees
SEE
Se
'sR 2
=
oa "4 orc
no
ee # os
a) Trade Practices - application under s.52 and accrued Jurisdiction - loan agreement - alleged representations by branch manager of
furst respondent as to soundness of business venture for which
loan sought - whether misleading or deceptive - whether fraudulent er negligent misrepresentation - applicants not advised by respondents to seek independent legal advice on loan agreement -
breach of fiducirary duty alleged - whether fiduciary relationship
between applicants and respondents
Trade Practices Act 1974 5.52
BARRY EDWARD STANTON and BRONWYN MARGARET STANTON v. AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LTD.
and ESANDA LIMITED
No. WA G77 of 1985
TOOHEY J.
PERTH
16 DECEMBER 1986 '
IN THE FEDERAL COURT ! UF AUSTRALIA ! WESTERN AUSTRALIA ) No. WA G77 of 1285 DISTRICT REGISTRY ' GENERAL DIVISION !
BETWEEN: BARRY EDWARD STANTON and
BRONWYN MARGARET STANTON Applicants
and
AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LTD.
First Respondent and ESANDA LIMITED
Second Respondent
MINUTE OF ORDER
JUDGE MAKING ORDER: TOOHEY J. DATE OF ORDER: 16 December 1986
WHERE MADE: Perth
THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The application is dismissed.
2. The applicants pay the respondents' costs of the application.
Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION
No. WA G77 of 1985
eee ene
BETWEEN:
BARRY EDWARD STANTON and BRONWYN MARGARET STANTON Applicants
and
AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND BANKING GROUP LTD.
First Respondent and ESANDA LIMITED
Second Respondent
CORAM: TOOHEY J. 16 December 1986
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
This is a claim against a bank and a finance company arising out of a loan obtained by the applicants. Mr. Stanton, in the course of his work as a boilermaker, got to know Alan Harris who was conducting a liquid waste business. Mr. Harris suggested to Mr. Stanton that he buy one of Mr. Harris' trucks and that the two men carry out a co-operative enterprise in removing liquid waste in the area around Gosnells. The price of the truck was $10,000. Harris would provide Stanton with fifty contracts for liquid waste removal and Stanton would pay Harris $5,000 a year
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