Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia Watt v Shepherd (No 3) [2021] FCA 1670 File number(s): NSD 922 of 2019
Judgment of: RARES J
Date of judgment: 13 December 2021
Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – relief – application for compensation order under ss 237 and 243 of the Australian Consumer Law – where respondents engaged in misleading or deceptive or unconscionable conduct inducing applicants to enter into franchise agreements and an agreement to assign trade receivables – whether compensation sum should take into account benefits applicants obtained under avoided franchise agreements
Legislation: Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) sch 2, ss 237, 243 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
Cases cited: HTW Valuers (Central QLD) Pty Ltd v Astonland Pty Ltd (2004) 217 CLR 640 I & L Securities Pty Limited v HTW Valuers (Brisbane) Pty Limited (2002) 210 CLR 109 Marks v GIO Australia Holdings Limited (1998) 196 CLR 494 Ted Brown Quarries Pty Ltd v General Quarries (Gilston) Pty Ltd (1977) 16 ALR 23 Watt v Shepherd [2021] FCA 561 Watt v Shepherd (No 2) [2021] FCA 826 Wyzenbeek v Australasian Marine Imports Pty Ltd (2019) 272 FCR 373
Division: General Division
Registry: New South Wales
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection
Number of paragraphs: 31
Date of hearing: 13 December 2021
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr R Parsons
Solicitor for the Applicants: Bray Jackson & Co
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