Bowles v Stratton

In the matter of *Bowles v Stratton*, the Supreme Court of Queensland was asked to determine a dispute between the applicant, Mr. Bowles, and the respondent, Ms. Stratton. The core of the disagreement concerned the interpretation and enforceability of a deed of settlement entered into by the parties.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the deed of settlement, which purported to resolve a prior dispute between Mr. Bowles and Ms. Stratton, was valid and binding. Specifically, the Court had to consider whether Ms. Stratton had been induced to enter into the deed by misleading or deceptive conduct on the part of Mr. Bowles, and if so, what the consequences of such conduct would be for the deed's validity.

Judge Hartnett found that Mr. Bowles had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct in contravention of section 52 of the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth) (now section 18 of the *Australian Consumer Law*). His Honour concluded that Ms. Stratton had relied on these misrepresentations when entering into the deed of settlement. Consequently, the Court determined that the deed was voidable at the instance of Ms. Stratton.

The Court ordered that the deed of settlement be set aside.