Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Enterprise Finance Solutions Pty Limited v Austec Pty Limited [2013] FCA 491 Citation: Enterprise Finance Solutions Pty Limited v Austec Pty Limited [2013] FCA 491
Parties: ENTERPRISE FINANCE SOLUTIONS PTY LIMITED v AUSTEC PTY LIMITED and JOHN HARRISON and LYNETTE HARRISON; AUSTEC PTY LIMITED and JOHN HARRISON and LYNETTE HARRISON v ENTERPRISE FINANCE SOLUTIONS PTY LIMITED and AUSTRALIAN EQUIPMENT RENTALS PTY LIMITED
File Number: NSD 1192 of 2010
Parties: QUIKFUND (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED v AIRMARK CONSOLIDATORS PTY LIMITED and MARK GONSALVES; AIRMARK CONSOLIDATORS PTY LIMITED and MARK GONSALVES v QUIKFUND (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED
File Number: NSD 1206 of 2010
Parties: QUIKFUND (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED v AIRMARK CONSOLIDATORS PTY LIMITED and MARK GONSALVES; AIRMARK CONSOLIDATORS PTY LIMITED and MARK GONSALVES v QUIKFUND (AUSTRALIA) PTY LIMITED
File Number: NSD 1207 of 2010
Judge: NICHOLAS J
Date of judgment: 24 May 2013
Catchwords: TRADE PRACTICES – where equipment supplier made misrepresentation to consumer concerning price of goods – where finance company acquired goods for hire to consumer – where equipment hired to consumer by finance company – whether finance company "linked credit provider" for purposes of s 73 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (TP Act) – whether s 51AF of TP Act operated to exclude application of s 73 because misrepresentation made by equipment supplier related to financial services. AGENCY – where equipment supplier made misrepresentation concerning price of goods – where finance company acquired goods for hire to consumer – where finance company "linked credit provider" for purposes of s 73 of TP Act – whether equipment supplier agent of linked credit provider under general law – whether equipment supplier possessed ostensible authority to make representation on behalf of linked credit provider – significance of documents in nature of applications for finance provided by finance company for use by equipment supplier. CONSUMER LAW – where director of company entered into contract of guarantee and indemnity guaranteeing company's obligations under rental agreement with finance company – whether such contract was unjust in the circumstances relating to contract at the time it was made for purposes of Contracts Review Act 1980 (NSW) – whether there should be declaration that contract of guarantee and indemnity void with effect from time it was made.
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