BEIM & ORS. V. COLLINS & ANOR

oa

'HL 4, Groen, Got, Print, Melb.

Co

—_—_-

fo

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA. Ararat .

. of

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT.

BEIM & ORS.

Ve

COLLINS & ANOR.

ORDER

Appeal dismissed with costs.

JUDGM:

r

BEIM & ORS

Vv. COLLINS & ANOR

ve

CO. iS_& ANO:

This is an appeal from an order of the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Queensland refusing an application for a new trial in an action of deceit. The jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs for £3125 damages. The defendants sought to have this verdict set aside on grounds which include the ground that having regard to the evidence the assessment of damages was unreasonable. It is upon this ground that the appellants support their appeal to this Court.

The respondents, who are husband and wife, entered into a contract dated 13th February 1951 to purchase from the defendants for the price of £1000 a half interest in a laundry business, described as a laundrette, theretofore conducted by the defendants. The misrepresentation which the plaintiffs set up was that the profits of the business were between £60 and £80 a week, The defendants denied making these representations but admitted that the profits were less in fact than £60 a week and that the defendants were aware that the profits were less than £60 a week. The jury must be taken to have accepted fully the plaintiffs' allegation that the representation was made and, of course, its falsity and knowledge of its falsity inevitably followed. In fact these latter issues were not put to the jury. The assets of the business included the residue of a term of a lease, some plant and chattels, including a motor vehicle and the business or goodwill. The agreement of purchase required that the purchase money of £4000 should be paid by an instalment of £1000 payable at once, a further instalment of £1000 to be paid on 15th March 1951, that is a month after the date of the contract, and the balance of £2000 by monthly