D’Cruz v Coutinho [2025] NSWSC 150

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: D'Cruz v Coutinho [2025] NSWSC 150 Hearing dates: 24 February 2025 Date of orders: 6 March 2025 Decision date: 06 March 2025 Jurisdiction: Equity Before: Hammerschlag CJ in Eq Decision: Judgment for the plaintiffs against each of the first, second, fourth and sixth defendants for $854,010, together with pre-judgment interest. Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – Australian Consumer Law (ACL) s 18 – Claim for damages against defendants who made misrepresentations to the plaintiffs which induced them to invest in worthless property investment opportunities – Sixth defendant claims that he was acting as a mere conduit in the provision of information, was a mere introducer and is protected by disclaimers in his emails – HELD – Defendants engaged in conduct which was misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive – First defendant was a person involved in the contraventions by the second and fourth defendants – Sixth defendant was not a mere conduit or introducer and did not establish the existence of any disclaimer – Because of the conduct of the defendants the plaintiffs suffered loss Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), Sch 2 – Australian Consumer Law Cases Cited: ACCC v Glaxo-SmithKline Consumer Healthcare Australia Pty Ltd [2019] FCA 676; (2019) 371 ALR 396 Butcher v Lachlan Elder Realty Pty Ltd (2004) 218 CLR 592; [2004] HCA 60 CH Real Estate Pty Ltd v Jainran Pty Ltd [2010] NSWCA 37; (2010) 14 BPR 27,361 [98410] Henville v Walker (2001) 206 CLR 459; [2001] HCA 52 I & L Securities Pty Ltd v HTW Valuers (Brisbane) Pty Ltd (2002) 210 CLR 109; [2002] HCA 41 Milner v Delita Pty Ltd (1985) 61 ALR 557 Yorke v Lucas (1985) 158 CLR 661; [1985] HCA 65 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Beryl Clotilda D'Cruz (First Plaintiff) Stanislaus Gregory D'Cruz (Second Plaintiff)