Pollock v Hicks [2015] NSWCA 122

Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Pollock v Hicks [2015] NSWCA 122 Hearing dates: 16 April 2015 Decision date: 08 May 2015 Before: Macfarlan JA at [1]; Emmett JA at [2]; Gleeson JA at [5] Decision: 1. Appeal allowed. 2. Set aside orders 1 and 2 made by Robison DCJ on 12 June 2014. 3. In lieu thereof order: (a) judgment for the second defendant against the plaintiff; (b) the plaintiff to pay the second defendant's costs as agreed or assessed. 4. Respondent to pay the appellant's costs in this Court. 5. The respondent to have a certificate under the Suitors' Fund Act 1951 (NSW) if otherwise qualified. Catchwords: TRADE AND COMMERCE – Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) – false or misleading representations – unconscionable conduct – accessorial liability – whether appellant involved in a contravention – statements made by appellant's husband – whether appellant knew representations made and of facts which made them false or misleading or unconscionable – appellant lacked requisite knowledge – appellant not involved in a contravention Legislation Cited: Australian Consumer Law 2010 ss 4, 21, 29, 236 Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) ss 75B, 82 Sch 2 Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) ss 32, 43, 44, 61, 68, Sch 5, Pt 4, cl 16 Fair Trading Amendment (Australian Consumer Law) Act 2010 (NSW) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 6, 51A, 51AC, 53, 82, Pts IV, IVA, IVB, V Trade Practices Amendment (Australian Consumer Law) Act (No 2) 2010 (Cth) s 2, Sch 7, cl 6(1). Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 51.53 Cases Cited: Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v IMB Group Pty Ltd [2003] FCAFC 17 Bauskis v Liew [2013] NSWCA 297 Coggin v Telstar Finance Company (Queensland) Pty Ltd [2006] FCA 191 Hamod v State of New South Wales [2011] NSWCA 375 Heydon v NRMA Ltd [2000] NSWCA 374; 51 NSWLR 1 Hicks v Pollock (District Court (NSW), Robison DCJ, 12 June 2014, unrep) Jeray v Blue Mountains City Council (No 2) [2010] NSWCA 367 Keller v LED Technologies Pty Ltd [2010] FCAFC 55; 185 FCR 449 Medical Benefits Fund of Australia v Cassidy (2004) 205 ALR 402 Quinlivan v Australian Competition and Consumer Commission [2004] FCAFC 175; 160 FCR 1 Yorke v Lucas [1985] HCA 65; 158 CLR 661 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Cathy Rae Pollock (Appellant) Ricky Eric Hicks (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: E G Romaniuk SC with M A Kumar (Appellant) K G Bennett with T T Baw (Respondent)