Maggbury Pty Ltd & Anor v Hafele Australia Pty Ltd

Maggbury Pty Ltd and another party (the appellants) appealed to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Full Federal Court concerning a dispute with Hafele Australia Pty Ltd (the respondent). The core of the dispute involved allegations of misleading and deceptive conduct in contravention of the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth) (now the *Competition and Consumer Act 2010* (Cth)). The appellants claimed that the respondent had made representations about the availability of certain goods, which they relied upon to their detriment.

The High Court was required to determine whether the respondent had engaged in conduct that was misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive, in contravention of section 52 of the *Trade Practices Act 1974*. Specifically, the court had to consider the nature of the representations made by the respondent regarding the supply of goods and whether those representations were substantiated by reasonable grounds at the time they were made. The court also had to assess whether the appellants had suffered loss or damage as a consequence of any such misleading or deceptive conduct.

The High Court, in its joint judgment, clarified the principles governing liability for misleading or deceptive conduct under section 52. The court emphasised that the focus is on the effect of the conduct on the relevant audience, and that a representation as to future matters will be misleading if it is not based on reasonable grounds. The court found that the representations made by the respondent concerning the availability of goods were not substantiated by reasonable grounds, and therefore constituted misleading or deceptive conduct. The court also found that the appellants had established a causal link between the respondent's conduct and their loss.

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the orders of the Full Federal Court and remitting the matter to the Federal Court for determination of the quantum of damages.