Expectation Pty Ltd v PRD Realty Pty Ltd

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Expectation Pty Ltd v PRD Realty Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 175

TRADE AND COMMERCE – s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) – whether representations made – whether representations relied on

Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 52, 82, 87
Federal Court of Australia Act 1974 (Cth) s 51
Fair Trading Act 1989 (Qld) ss 99, 100

Watson & Foxman and Others (2000) 49 NSWLR 315 referred to
Gates v City Mutual Life Assurance Society Ltd (1985-86) 160 CLR 1 followed
Spencer v The Commonwealth (1907) 5 CLR 418

EXPECTATION PTY LTD (ACN 009 030 102) v PRD REALTY PTY LTD (ACN 009 954 956) and OTHERS

No WG 181 of 1996

SPENDER J
BRISBANE
11 MARCH 2003

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	WG 181 OF 1996

BETWEEN:

EXPECTATION PTY LTD (ACN 009 030 102)
APPLICANT

AND:

PRD REALTY PTY LTD (ACN 009 954 956)
FIRST RESPONDENT

GORDON DOUGLAS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JOHN HAMMOND
THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

SPENDER J

DATE OF ORDER:

11 MARCH 2003

WHERE MADE:

BRISBANE

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The parties provide written submissions within 14 days as to orders the Court should make, including orders as to costs, so as to give effect to the judgment.

Note:    Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
WESTERN AUSTRALIA DISTRICT REGISTRY	WG 181 OF 1996

BETWEEN:

EXPECTATION PTY LTD (ACN 009 030 102)
APPLICANT

AND:

PRD REALTY PTY LTD (ACN 009 954 956)
FIRST RESPONDENT

GORDON DOUGLAS
SECOND RESPONDENT

JOHN HAMMOND
THIRD RESPONDENT

JUDGE:	SPENDER J
DATE:	11 MARCH 2003
PLACE:	BRISBANE

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an application pursuant to s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) (“the TP Act”). The original application and Statement of Claim were filed on 5 December 1996. Expectation Pty Ltd (“Expectation”) was formed as Trustee of the Daisy Hill Family Trust. Though Expectation is the applicant in these proceedings, the central figure for the applicant is Mr Daniel Hill, the husband of Daisy Hill. Mr Hill is an investor of considerable wealth who rose from humble beginnings. His senior counsel described him as a “serious and well-heeled investor”. 

2. The conduct in issue in these proceedings relates to the entering into contracts to purchase two commercial shopping centres by the applicant. The transactions were arranged through Mr Gordon Douglas (“Mr Douglas”) the second respondent, who was at all material times a director of PRD Realty Pty Ltd (“PRD Realty”) the first respondent.  The transaction that is the subject of the first part of these proceedings is the purchase of Benowa Gardens Shopping Centre (“Benowa Gardens”).  A very real difficulty in this case is the conflict of interest and of duty that arises because PRD Realty was the vendor’s agent in the sale of  Benowa Gardens, and Mr Douglas also acted as buying agent and adviser to Mr Hill and Expectation concerning real estate acquisitions.…