Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Reinhardt v Mill Estate Holdings Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1056 Citation: Reinhardt v Mill Estate Holdings Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 1056
Appeal from: Mill Estate Holdings Pty Ltd v Reinhardt [2014] FCCA 906
Parties: BRYAN REINHARDT and REINHARDT PTY LTD ACN 096 681 060 AS TRUSTEE FOR THE REINHARDT FAMILY TRUST v MILL ESTATE HOLDINGS PTY LTD ACN 119 975 505
File number: QUD 266 of 2014
Judge: RARES J
Date of judgment: 19 August 2014
Catchwords: CONTRACTS – MISLEADING OR DECEPTIVE CONDUCT – whether misleading or deceptive representations made to induce sale of business – alleged representation that principal of vendor would remain in employ of purchaser for term of two years – whether any reliance – failure of trial judge to take into account context of transaction including express terms of contracts – where business sale contract contemplated potential for principal of vendor to not commence or remain in purchaser's employment and provided for restraints of trade on principal – where no reference to two year term of employment discussed after business sale contract entered into – where employment contract entered into after completion of sale contract permitted termination or resignation of vendor's principal with one week's notice – meaning of commercial documents determined by what reasonable person in position of parties would have understood them to mean – need for representation to be assessed with respect to particular individual rather than a class having regard to all of the circumstances
Cases cited: Pacific Carriers Ltd v BNP Paribas (2004) 218 CLR 451 applied Campomar Sociedad, Limitada v Nike International Ltd (2000) 202 CLR 45 applied Butcher v Lachlan Elder Realty Pty Ltd (2004) 218 CLR 592 applied Miller & Associates Insurance Broking Pty Ltd v BMW Australia Finance Ltd (2010) 241 CLR 357 applied Parkdale Custom Built Furniture Pty Ltd v Puxu Pty Ltd (1982) 149 CLR 191 applied Gates v The City Mutual Life Assurance Society Limited (1986) 160 CLR 1 applied Catalano v Managing Australia Destinations Pty Ltd [2014] FCAFC 55 referred to Baltic Shipping Company v Dillon (1993) 176 CLR 344 applied
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