Firmstone & Anor v Estate Property Holdings Pty Ltd & Anor

The applicants, Firmstone and another, sought to appeal a decision of the Supreme Court of Victoria concerning a dispute over a lease agreement. The respondents were Estate Property Holdings Pty Ltd and another. The core of the dispute involved allegations of misleading and deceptive conduct in relation to representations made about the leased premises.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the representations made by the respondents regarding the suitability of the premises for the applicants' intended business constituted misleading or deceptive conduct under the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth) (now the *Competition and Consumer Act 2010* (Cth)). Specifically, the court had to determine if the respondents knew or ought to have known that the premises were not suitable for the applicants' intended use, and if their statements to the contrary were therefore misleading.

The High Court considered the nature of the representations made and the knowledge of the respondents at the time. Their Honours applied the principles established in cases concerning misleading or deceptive conduct, focusing on whether the statements made were likely to mislead a reasonable person in the position of the applicants. The court examined the evidence regarding the respondents' awareness of potential issues with the premises, such as zoning restrictions or structural limitations, which could impact the applicants' business operations. The reasoning focused on the objective likelihood of the representations misleading the applicants, taking into account the information available to the respondents.

The High Court allowed the appeal, finding that the representations made by the respondents were indeed misleading and deceptive. The matter was remitted to the Supreme Court of Victoria for further determination of the appropriate remedies.