Makrenos v Papaioannou

The appeal by Makrenos against the decision of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) involved a dispute over misleading or deceptive conduct under the Fair Trading Act 1999 (Vic). The Tribunal had refused the appellants leave to amend their claim to allege that the loss they suffered was caused by a misrepresentation made to a third party. The appellants sought to appeal this decision, arguing that their claim was arguable and should not have been dismissed by the Tribunal.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the claim presented by the appellants was sufficiently arguable to warrant a grant of leave to amend their pleadings. Specifically, the court needed to determine if the appellants' claim that they suffered loss due to a misrepresentation made to a third party was plausible enough to merit consideration. The appellants contended that the Tribunal had erred in dismissing their claim without granting leave to amend. The respondents argued that the claim was not arguable as it did not adequately establish a causal link between the alleged misrepresentation and the loss suffered by the appellants.

The court considered the criteria for determining whether a claim is arguable and whether it was appropriate to grant leave to amend pleadings. It found that the Tribunal had correctly assessed that the appellants' claim was not sufficiently arguable to warrant an amendment. The court held that the appellants had not demonstrated a plausible causal link between the alleged misrepresentation to the third party and the loss they suffered. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Tribunal's decision, affirming that the claim was not arguable and thus, no leave to amend should have been granted.

The court's decision was final, and the Tribunal's refusal to grant leave to amend the claim was upheld. The appellants were not permitted to amend their claim to include the alleged misrepresentation made to the third party.