Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Buggy v Reinisch [2010] FCA 917 Citation: Buggy v Reinisch [2010] FCA 917
Parties: MICHAEL FRANCIS BUGGY v FRANK REINISCH AND ORS
File number: NSD 1229 of 2009
Judge: FLICK J
Date of judgment: 25 August 2010
Catchwords: TRADE PRACTICES – misleading or deceptive conduct EVIDENCE – onus of proof – Jones v Dunkel – Browne v Dunn
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) Fair Trading Act 1989 (Qld), ss 38, 99, 100 Fair Trading Act 1999 (Vic), ss 9, 158, 159 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Federal Court Rules Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth), ss 52, 82, 87
Cases cited: Browne v Dunn (1894) 6 R 67, cited Ghazal v Government Insurance Office of New South Wales (1992) 29 NSWLR 336, cited Jones v Dunkel (1959) 101 CLR 298, considered Telstra Corporation Ltd v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2008] FCA 1436, 171 FCR 174, cited Unsted v Unsted (1947) 47 SR (NSW) 495, cited Mellinkoff, D, The Language of the Law (1963) Silving, H, 'The Oath' (1959) 68 Yale L J 1329
Dates of hearing: 30 June and 5 July 2010
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: Catchwords
Number of paragraphs: 81
Counsel for the Applicant: Mr E Hyde
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