Schneider v Hoechst Schering Agrevo & Anor ( S55-01) SLA

Schneider (the applicant) sought leave to appeal against a decision of the Full Federal Court. The dispute concerned the applicant's claim for damages for alleged breaches of contract and misleading and deceptive conduct by Hoechst Schering Agrevo Pty Ltd and Hoechst Schering Agrevo (the respondents). The applicant alleged that the respondents had engaged in conduct that caused loss to the applicant in relation to the sale of certain agricultural chemicals.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether the Full Federal Court had erred in its interpretation and application of the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth) (now the *Competition and Consumer Act 2010* (Cth)), specifically in relation to the assessment of damages for misleading and deceptive conduct. The applicant contended that the Full Federal Court had applied an incorrect measure of damages, failing to properly account for the loss suffered as a result of the respondents' conduct.

Gleeson CJ and McHugh J, in their joint judgment, considered the principles governing the award of damages under the *Trade Practices Act*. They affirmed that the aim of such damages is to place the applicant in the position they would have been in had the misleading or deceptive conduct not occurred. The Court analysed the evidence and the findings of the lower courts regarding the causal link between the respondents' conduct and the applicant's loss, ultimately concluding that the Full Federal Court's assessment of damages was not demonstrably wrong.

Leave to appeal was refused.