Madison Constructions Pty Ltd v Empire Building Group (ACT) Pty Ltd

Madison Constructions Pty Ltd sought interlocutory relief against Empire Building Group (ACT) Pty Ltd, alleging that Empire’s branding of its project as “Madison Gardens” either constituted passing off Madison’s goodwill and reputation or was misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive consumers about Madison’s association with Empire’s project. Madison argued that Empire’s use of the name “Madison Gardens” was an error in the description of the property, which could result in rescission or damages under s 11(1)(h) of the Civil Law (Sale of Residential Property) Act 2003 (ACT). Empire contended that a change of name or branding of a development did not constitute an error in the description of the property under s 11(1)(h).

The court needed to determine whether the words “error in description” in s 11(1)(h) referred to the branding or name of the project or the land, property, or title to the land sold. The court examined relevant legal principles and precedents to assess Empire’s argument that the description of the property under s 11(1)(h) should encompass the branding or name of the project. The court concluded that the description of the property under s 11(1)(h) referred to the title to the land sold, and not to the branding or name of the project.

Based on its findings, the court granted an interlocutory injunction restraining Empire from using the name “Madison Gardens” in connection with the marketing, construction, and sale of its residential apartment development at Harrison, on the condition that Mr O’Keeffe provided an undertaking to cover any potential damages.

The court’s decision clarified that the description of the property under s 11(1)(h) refers to the title to the land sold, and not to the branding or name of the project. This decision provided guidance on the interpretation of s 11(1)(h) and the scope of potential errors in the description of the property that could result in rescission or damages. The court also granted interlocutory relief to Madison, restraining Empire from using the name “Madison Gardens” in connection with its residential apartment development, subject to the condition that Mr O’Keeffe provided an undertaking to cover any potential damages.