Haggis v Bourke

In *Haggis v Bourke*, the Supreme Court of Victoria considered a dispute between the plaintiff, Haggis, and the defendant, Bourke, concerning the enforceability of a guarantee.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the defendant's guarantee of the plaintiff's debt was valid and enforceable, notwithstanding certain alleged misrepresentations made by the plaintiff. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the defendant was induced to enter into the guarantee by misleading or deceptive conduct on the part of the plaintiff, and if so, whether this conduct vitiated the guarantee.

Judge Jones found that the plaintiff had indeed engaged in conduct that was misleading or deceptive in contravention of the relevant consumer protection legislation. The Court reasoned that the defendant relied on these misrepresentations when deciding to provide the guarantee. Consequently, the Court held that the guarantee was unenforceable against the defendant.

The Court ordered that the plaintiff take nothing by its claim and that the defendant be entitled to her costs.