Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd (No 3)

Link copied
Case Copied 26 min read

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd (No 3) [2023] FCA 812  

File number(s): VID 266 of 2020
Judgment of: BUTTON J
Date of judgment: 18 July 2023
Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – scope of new trial – where trial judge held the respondent had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct in relation to apartment sold off-the-plan – where trial judge found render contained in marketing materials conveyed misleading and deceptive representations – where Full Court held the primary judge had erred in rejecting evidence of a witness – where Full Court allowed appeal and ordered a new trial limited to the issue of whether the applicants continued to rely on the respondent’s misleading or deceptive conduct within a specified period, and if resolved in favour of the applicants, the relief that should be granted – whether the ambit of the new trial extended to the issue of whether the representations were expunged by the date the contract of sale became binding   
Cases cited:

Athens v Randwick City Council (2005) 64 NSWLR 58

Butcher v Lachlan Elder Realty Pty Ltd (2004) 218 CLR 592

Century Legend Pty Ltd v Ripani [2022] FCAFC 191

Hinds v Ross [2006] FCA 41

Lim v Comcare (2019) 165 ALD 217; [2019] FCAFC 104

Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 242

Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection
Number of paragraphs: 31
Date of hearing: 17 July 2023
Counsel for the Applicants: Mr S W Stuckey KC with Mr B Barr
Solicitor for the Applicants: Zervos Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondent: Ms G Costello KC with Dr K Weston-Scheuber
Solicitor for the Respondent: Mills Oakley

ORDERS

VID 266 of 2020
BETWEEN:

WALTER RIPANI

First Applicant

NINA RIPANI

Second Applicant

AND:

CENTURY LEGEND PTY LTD (ACN 168 485 149)

Respondent

ORDER MADE BY:

BUTTON J

DATE OF ORDER:

18 JULY 2023

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.The new trial ordered by the Full Court (by paragraph 4(a) of the orders made on 30 November 2022 in VID 148 of 2022) is limited to the following two issues:

1.Did the Ripanis continue to rely on the truth of the Representations (as defined in the agreed statement of facts) when the Ripanis:

(a) conveyed to Century Legend that they were satisfied with the floor plan; and

(b) provided the bank guarantee?

2. What orders should the Court make under s 237 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) for compensation and under s 243 of the ACL in the circumstances of this case?

Note:   Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.


REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

BUTTON J:

  1. On 18 March 2022, the primary judge delivered his reasons following the trial of the proceeding brought by the applicants (the Ripanis): Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 242 (Ripani PJ). Put broadly, the proceeding alleged that the respondent vendor (Century Legend)…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd (No 3) and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2023] FCA 812
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Ripani v Century Legend Pty Ltd (No 3) involved a dispute between the Ripanis and Century Legend Pty Ltd, a property developer, over the sale of an apartment. The matter was heard in the Federal Court of Australia. The primary issue before the court was the scope of a new trial that had been ordered by the Full Court, which found that the primary judge had erred in rejecting evidence of a witness. The Full Court allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, limited to specific issues related to whether the applicants continued to rely on the respondent's misleading and deceptive conduct and, if so, the relief that should be granted.

The Full Court determined that the new trial should be confined to the question of whether the applicants continued to rely on the misleading or deceptive conduct by the respondent within a specified period. This decision was made after the Full Court held that the primary judge had erred in rejecting the evidence of a witness. The court also needed to determine whether the new trial's ambit extended to the issue of whether the representations were expunged by the date the contract of sale became binding. Ultimately, the Full Court limited the scope of the new trial to two specific issues.

The court held that the new trial ordered by the Full Court should be limited to determining whether the applicants continued to rely on the respondent's misleading and deceptive conduct within the specified period and, if resolved in their favour, the relief that should be granted. The Full Court also clarified that the scope of the new trial did not extend to the issue of whether the representations were expunged by the date the contract of sale became binding. The final orders were that the new trial would be limited to the two specified issues and entry of orders would be dealt with in accordance with Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. The new trial ordered by the Full Court (by paragraph 4(a) of the orders made on 30 November 2022 in VID 148 of 2022) is limited to the following two issues:

1. Did the Ripanis continue to rely on the truth of the Representations (as defined in the agreed statement of facts) when the Ripanis:

(a) conveyed to Century Legend that they were satisfied with the floor plan; and

(b) provided the bank guarantee?

2. What orders should the Court make under s 237 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL) for compensation and under s 243 of the ACL in the circumstances of this case?

Note: Entry of orders is dealt with in Rule 39.32 of the Federal Court Rules 2011.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.