Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA TRADE PRACTICES - misleading and deceptive conduct - allegation that representations by the respondent in relation to the release dates for polymer bank notes were misleading and deceptive - representation by respondent that the new $5 polymer bank note would be released after Easter 1991 and other denominations would be released at six monthly intervals - where $5 note not released until July 1992 and other notes released at intervals substantially longer than six months - whether representations were made with respect to a future matter - whether representations merely statements as to respondent's existing state of mind - whether representations were made in trade or commerce - consideration of nature of respondent's functions and duties - consideration of respondent's commercial interests and activities - whether respondent is a prescribed information provider within s 65A of the Trade Practices Act 1974 - whether the respondent is in the business of providing information - whether bank notes are goods and services - whether respondent had reasonable grounds for making representations NEGLIGENCE - duty of care - whether respondent owed applicants a duty of care - whether necessary relationship of proximity - breach of duty of care - whether respondent breached of duty of care owed to applicants - whether respondent should have carried out a test production run prior to announcing release dates for $5 polymer bank note - whether respondent should have advised applicants as to the nature of production problems and the likely extent of the delay in releasing the notes Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), ss 4, 51A, 52, 65A Reserve Bank Act 1959 (Cth), ss 10, 26, 30, 34 Banking Act 1959 (Cth) Acts Interpretation Act 1901 (Cth), s 22(1) Ting v Blanche (1993) 118 ALR 543, cited Concrete Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd v Nelson (1990) 169 CLR 594, applied Unilan Holdings Pty Ltd v Kerin (1992) 35 FCR 272, distinguished Fasold v Roberts (1997) 145 ALR 548, cited Horwitz Grahame Books Pty Ltd v Performance Publications Pty Ltd (1987) 8 IPR 25, cited Banco de Portugal v Waterlow & Sons Ltd [1932] AC 452, cited San Sebastian Pty Ltd v Minister Administering the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (1986) 162 CLR 340, applied L Shaddock & Associates Pty Ltd v Parramatta City Council [No 1] (1981) 150 CLR 225, cited Drennan v Central Coast Hospitals and Area Health Service (Supreme Court of New South Wales, unreported 5 October 1990), distinguished PETER SYKES, BEVERLY MAY SYKES AND POLYBANK PTY LIMITED v RESERVE BANK OF AUSTRALIA NG 941 OF 1994 TAMBERLIN J SYDNEY 5 DECEMBER 1997
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