Hamer, R.J. & Anor [v Westpac Banking Corporation 1987] FCA 364

Wott

rn a

CATCHWORODS

TRADE PRACTICES -

s.52 - state of mind and intention of respondents ~ whether able to be misrepresented - whether "reckless indifference" as to intention may constitute misleading and deceptive conduct.

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - application to strike out statement of claim - allegations of "reckless indifference" to adherence to promise - pleading vague but allowed to stand.

Trade Practices Act s.52

Rupert James Hamer & Anor.

v. Westpac Banking Corporation Qld G27 of 1987

PINCUS J. BRISBANE 9 JULY 1987

FEDERAL COUR? j?

AUSTRALIA OF / '

PRINCIPAL . REGISTRY cf

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY ) QLD G27 of 1987 GENERAL DIVISION )

BETWEEN: RUPERT JAMES HAMER and BRIAN RICHARD GOLDSMITH

Applicants

AND: WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION

Respondent MINUTES OF ORDER JUDGE MAKING ORDER: PINCUS J. DATE OF ORDER: 9 JULY 1987 WHERE MADE: BRISBANE THE COURT ORDERS THAT: 1. The application made to strike out the statement of

claim be dismissed.

2. The costs of the application to strike out be the costs in the proceedings of Rupert James Hamer and Brian Richard Goldsmith, the applicants in the principal proceedings.

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

2 fsrs

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )

QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY ) QLD G27 of 1987 GENERAL DIVISION )

BETWEEN: RUPERT JAMES HAMER and BRIAN RICHARD GOLDSMITH

Applicants

AND: WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION

Respondent

PINCUS J. 9 JULY 1987

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

This is an application to strike out the statement of claim in proceedings brought in reliance upon s.52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974. The application relates to misrepresentations alleged to have been made 1n 1983. The representations, speaking generally, constitute or imply promises - i.e. they are "with respect to any future matter" within the meaning of s.51A of the