Capic v Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited (Form of Common Questions)

The matter before the court involved Capic, the plaintiff, and Ford Motor Company of Australia Limited, the defendant. The dispute centred on the form of common questions to be answered in a representative proceeding, which had been initiated under Part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1976. The plaintiff sought to represent a class of consumers in a claim against the defendant for misleading conduct under the Australian Consumer Law. The court was required to determine the appropriate manner in which the common questions should be framed in relation to the pleadings submitted by the parties.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the common questions should be formulated with specific reference to the pleadings in the representative proceeding. The court had to consider the proper construction of the pleadings to ascertain how they should influence the framing of the common questions. The plaintiff argued that the common questions should be closely aligned with the pleadings, while the defendant contended that the pleadings should not unduly constrain the scope of the common questions.

The court held that the common questions should not be strictly confined to the pleadings but should rather reflect the broader scope of the issues that the proceedings seek to address. The court emphasised the need for flexibility in framing the common questions to ensure that all relevant issues are adequately covered. It was noted that while the pleadings provide a framework, they should not be determinative of the precise wording of the common questions. The court concluded that the common questions should be framed in a manner that encompasses the essential issues raised by the pleadings but allows for a comprehensive exploration of the matters in dispute.

The court's decision resulted in a direction for the parties to reformulate the common questions in a way that reflects the broader scope of the issues in the representative proceeding. The court ordered that the common questions should be broad enough to cover all relevant issues while remaining specific enough to provide clear guidance for the determination of the proceeding. This approach ensures that the representative proceeding is conducted in a manner that is fair and efficient, while also protecting the rights of all parties involved.