Luu & Anor v Renevier

In the Federal Court of Australia, Waltip Pty Ltd and Anthony Michael Geaney sought relief against Capalaba Park Shopping Centre Pty Ltd under section 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974, claiming they were misled into entering a lease by the landlord's agent. The applicants intended to establish a franchised fast food shop in the shopping centre. The landlord's agent, Greer, showed the applicants a plan of the area, which omitted a planned kiosk that would obstruct visibility and access to the shop. Despite this omission, the applicants signed a lease on 8 April 1986. They discovered the kiosk on 25 May 1986 but proceeded with the lease. The applicants claimed the misleading plan induced them to enter the lease and resulted in significant financial loss when the shop failed to attract customers.

The court had to decide whether the landlord's conduct constituted misleading or deceptive conduct under the Trade Practices Act, and if so, whether the applicants were entitled to damages. The court also examined the effect of a deed of acknowledgment, which stated that no representations or statements influenced the applicants' decision to lease the property. The landlord argued this deed absolved them of liability. The court found the landlord's conduct misleading and that the deed did not negate the statutory remedy for misleading conduct. The court awarded the applicants damages for their financial losses, excluding lost profits, as the applicants would not have entered the lease if not for the misleading conduct.

The court concluded that the landlord was liable for the applicants' financial losses, including costs associated with the leased equipment, less a credit for an over-stated amount in the claim. The court ordered the landlord to pay the applicants $93,600 in damages and the applicants' costs of the proceedings.