Plummer v Osticat Pty Limited

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal by Warren Douglas Plummer against Osticat Pty Limited. The dispute concerned the construction of section 52 of the *Trade Practices Act*. While the Full Court had characterised the matter as factual, it acknowledged that a difficult question of principle was involved, specifically whether the respondent had contravened section 52.

The central legal issue before the High Court was the proper construction of section 52 of the *Trade Practices Act*, particularly in light of the High Court's previous decision in *YORKE V LUCAS*. The applicant argued that the Full Court had misunderstood the principles established in *YORKE V LUCAS* regarding disclaimers of belief in information being passed on. The applicant contended that the Full Court erred in its application of the *YORKE V LUCAS* principles to the facts of this case.

The applicant's submission focused on the passage in *YORKE V LUCAS* which suggested that a corporation passing on information supplied by another might not be engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct if it expressly or impliedly disclaims any belief in its truth or falsity, and makes it apparent that it is not the source of the information. The applicant submitted that the Full Court had failed to properly consider this aspect of *YORKE V LUCAS* when determining whether the respondent had contravened section 52. The applicant's argument was that the Full Court's interpretation of the disclaimer principle was flawed.