Mandhan v Toyota Finance Australia Limited (No 2)

In the Federal Court of Australia, the case of Mandhan v Toyota Finance Australia Limited (No 2) involved an interlocutory application brought by the applicant, Mandhan, against the respondent, Toyota Finance Australia Limited. The dispute centred around a finance agreement for a vehicle, with the applicant seeking relief on the basis that the respondent had engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of section 1041H of the Corporations Act 2001. The court was tasked with determining whether the application should be dismissed and whether the applicant should be ordered to pay the respondent’s costs.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant had demonstrated a serious question to be tried in relation to the alleged misleading or deceptive conduct by the respondent. The court needed to assess the merits of the applicant’s claims, particularly focusing on whether there were sufficient grounds to suggest that the respondent's conduct had breached the statutory provisions. This involved examining the evidence provided by the applicant and the respondent's submissions to determine the likelihood of success on the merits of the case.

The court found that the applicant had not established a serious question to be tried. It concluded that the applicant's claims were not well-founded and lacked sufficient evidence to support a trial on the merits. The court emphasised the need for a strong prima facie case to be made out before an interlocutory injunction could be granted. As a result, the application was dismissed, and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs associated with the interlocutory application. The detailed reasoning and findings of the court are set out in the written reasons for judgment.