Hayle Holdings Pty Ltd v Australian Technology Group Ltd

[2000] FCA 1242

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Hayle Holdings Pty Ltd v Australian Technology Group Ltd [2000] FCA 1242

TRADE PRACTICES – misleading and deceptive conduct – alleged representations during negotiations for, and after completion of, agreement for provision of venture capital – whether, but for the alleged misleading and deceptive conduct, the applicants would not have entered the agreement – whether, but for the alleged misleading and deceptive conduct, the applicants would have gone to the United States in April or November 1995 in search of alternate venture capital – whether the third applicant acted in reliance upon the representations made by the respondent – whether concealment of, or failure to disclose that a condition of the deal had not been withdrawn constitutes misleading and deceptive conduct for the purposes of s 52

DAMAGES – loss of opportunity – damages for loss of a chance - causation – whether, had the applicants gone the United States in November 1995, they could and would have obtained alternate venture capital, and established a successful business in the United States – whether the opportunity to obtain alternative venture capital has been lost, by reason of the respondent’s misleading and deceptive conduct

DAMAGES – damages for trading losses incurred as a result of the postponement of the decision to close down the Sydney operation

Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss51A, 51A(2), 52

R v Murphy [1985] 4 NSWLR 42 referred to
Watson v Foxman (Supreme Court of NSW, McLelland J, 3 August 1995, unreported) applied
Christofidellis v Zdrilic [1999] FCA 39 cited

Paramedical Services Pty Limited v Ambulance Service of NSW [1999] FCA 548 cited
Jaldiver Pty Limited v Nelumbo Pty Limited (1993) ATPR (Digest) 46-097 cited
Lam v Ausintel Investments Australia Pty Limited (1989) 97 FLR 458 applied
Demagogue Pty Limited v Ramensky (1992) 39 FCR 31 applied
Poseidon Limited v Adelaide Petroleum NL (1991) 105 ALR 25 referred to
Marks v GIO Australia Holdings Limited (1998) 196 CLR 494 applied
Sellars v Adelaide Petroleum NL (1994) 179 CLR 332 applied
Bennett v Minister of Community Welfare (1982) 176 CLR 408 applied

HAYLE HOLDINGS PTY LTD & ORS v AUSTRALIAN TECHNOLOGY GROUP LTD & ANOR

NG 1136 OF 1998

HELY J
5 SEPTEMBER 2000
SYDNEY

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY	NG 1136 OF 1998

BETWEEN:

HAYLE HOLDINGS PTY LTD
FIRST APPLICANT

PANCO ENTERPRISES PTY LTD
SECOND APPLICANT

NEVILLE JAMES BROWNE
THIRD APPLICANT

AND:

AUSTRALIAN TECHNOLOGY GROUP
FIRST RESPONDENT

BARRY WESTLAKE
SECOND RESPONDENT

JUDGE:

HELY J

DATE OF ORDER:

5 SEPTEMBER 2000

WHERE MADE:

SYDNEY

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.There be judgment for the applicants in the sum of $488,270.

2.There be reserved for further consideration the question of whether any relief should be granted to parties other than Hayle Holdings Pty Ltd in relation to the incurring of a liability to ATG in the sum of $300,000 pursuant to the agreements of 29 January 1996.

3.There be hearing of argument on the question of costs.

Note:    Settlement and entry…