Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Manday Investments Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (No 3) [2012] FCA 751 Citation: Manday Investments Pty Ltd v Commonwealth Bank of Australia (No 3) [2012] FCA 751
Parties: MANDAY INVESTMENTS PTY LTD ACN 074 281 084 and GEORGE ANAGNOSTOPOULOS, LILLIAN PAULA ANAGNOSTOPOULOS, RONALD WILLIAM ANDERSON AND ROSALINDA ANDERSON v COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA ACN 123 123 124 and BAVICH PTY LTD ACN 079 959 836 (FORMERLY AUSTRALIAN VALUATION SERVICES PTY LTD) AND DEAN ROBERT BAVICH
File number: WAD 233 of 2008
Judge: MCKERRACHER J
Date of judgment: 13 July 2012
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – whether the applicants had a reasonable prospect of success in pleading misleading or deceptive conduct by the bank's reliance on allegedly inaccurate property valuations – application for summary judgment by respondent bank and valuers pursuant to s 31A Federal Court Act 1976 (Cth) and r 26.01 Federal Court Rules 2011 – what onus if any on a party when all relevant evidence is held by the other CONTRACT – whether the applicants had a reasonable prospect of success in pleading breach of implied term of loan contract by the bank's reliance on allegedly inaccurate property valuations Held: applicants' breach of implied contractual term pleading should be summarily dismissed because the loan contract had expired and no automatic right of renewal TRADE PRACTICES – reliance and causation – consideration of applicants' conduct in chain of causation causing loss and reliance on valuations – held the respondents' causation argument (that the actions of the bank were unaffected by the valuations) could not be determined summarily because the question of what the bank would have done had the property valuations been higher could only be determined at trial by testing the evidence Held: however that the respondents' reliance argument should succeed insofar as the 'indirect causation theory' could not apply as there was no evidence that the applicants relied on the valuation at any time, they were not misled by the valuation and their own actions in selling the property were the cause of the loss
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