De Bortoli Wines Pty Ltd v HIH Insurance Ltd (in liq)

De Bortoli Wines Pty Ltd (DBW) appealed against a decision by the primary judge that DBW was not entitled to recover losses suffered on shares purchased in HIH Insurance Ltd (HIH) following misleading and deceptive conduct. The appeal was dismissed by the Full Court. DBW claimed to have suffered losses following multiple purchases of shares in HIH. The Liquidators of HIH rejected the proof of debt on the ground that the shares purchased by Aabrofay Pty Ltd (Aabrofay) were not a loss suffered by DBW. DBW relied on representations made by HIH in making the purchases, and argued that it was entitled to recover losses under the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). The primary judge found that DBW did not rely on the representations made by HIH in making the purchases. DBW appealed, arguing that the primary judge erred in finding that it did not rely on the representations. The Full Court found that the primary judge did not err in finding that DBW did not rely on the representations made by HIH in making the purchases. The Full Court found that the primary judge’s approach to the application of the accepted principles was not erroneous. The Full Court found that the primary judge was not satisfied that DBW relied on the statements comprised in the three categories of misleading information in deciding to enter into the 66 transactions for the purchase of shares in HIH. The Full Court found that the primary judge’s conclusions were to be read with her finding that she would not attach much weight to the statements made by Mr Clarke. The Full Court dismissed the appeal and ordered that DBW pay the Respondents’ costs of the appeal.