Goodridge v Leveraged Equities Limited & Anor; Goodridge v Macquarie Bank Limited & Anor

In *Goodridge v Leveraged Equities Limited & Anor; Goodridge v Macquarie Bank Limited & Anor*, the applicants, Mr and Mrs Goodridge, brought proceedings against Leveraged Equities Limited and Macquarie Bank Limited. The dispute concerned the applicants' participation in a managed investment scheme, specifically relating to the provision of financial advice and the subsequent investment in a property development. The proceedings were heard in the High Court of Australia.

The High Court was required to determine whether the respondents had breached their duties to the applicants. This involved considering whether the respondents had provided misleading or deceptive representations in contravention of the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth) and the *Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act 2001* (Cth). A key issue was whether the respondents had acted with due care and skill in their dealings with the applicants, particularly in relation to the suitability of the investment and the disclosure of risks.

The Court analysed the nature of the advice provided and the information disclosed to the applicants. It considered the application of the "but for" test in establishing causation for misleading or deceptive conduct. The judges examined the extent to which the respondents were aware of the applicants' financial circumstances and investment objectives, and whether this knowledge imposed a higher standard of care. The principles of statutory interpretation were applied to the relevant provisions of the *Trade Practices Act* and the *ASIC Act* to ascertain the scope of the respondents' obligations.

The High Court dismissed the applicants' appeals, finding that the respondents had not engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct. The Court concluded that the information provided to the applicants was not misleading and that the respondents had discharged their duties with the requisite care and skill.