Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Cash Bazaar Pty Ltd v RAA Consults Pty Ltd (No 2) [2020] FCA 636 File number: VID 1348 of 2017
Judge: STEWARD J
Date of judgment: 15 May 2020
Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – misleading or deceptive conduct – pre-contractual representations – alleged contraventions of s. 18 of the Australian Consumer Law – where first applicant entered into franchising agreements allegedly in reliance on representations made to its sole director and shareholder (the second applicant) with respect to guaranteed income and capital growth – where alleged that first respondent would pay the guaranteed income – where first applicant entered into a shareholders agreement with the second respondent allegedly in reliance on representations made to the second applicant with respect to guaranteed payments – where representations allegedly made by various officers and employees of the first respondent – where first and second respondents ceased making payments to the first applicant – where price of the franchising agreements did not increase – identification of the true nature of the representations – whether representations were as to future matters within the meaning of s. 4 of the Australian Consumer Law – whether respondents had reasonable grounds for making the representations
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth.) Sch. 2, Australian Consumer Law ss. 2, 4, 18, 236 Corporations Act 2001 (Cth.) s. 1305 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth.) s. 51A (repealed)
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