Specialised Printing Equipment v de Vries

In the Federal Court of Australia, the plaintiff, Specialised Printing Equipment, sought damages from the defendant, de Vries, for breach of contract and misleading and deceptive conduct. The dispute arose from a contract for the sale and delivery of printing equipment, where the purchase price was to be paid by a letter of credit in Great British pounds. The contract did not account for the potential fluctuation in exchange rates between Australian dollars and the British pound. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had agreed to procure forward exchange cover for the seller, which was not done, leading to a significant financial loss. Additionally, the plaintiff claimed that the defendant had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by misrepresenting the plaintiff's claim, which resulted in unnecessary costs associated with the receivership of the contract.

The court had to determine whether the parties had indeed agreed to vary the original contract by having the buyer procure forward exchange cover for the seller. It also had to decide whether the work done upon delivery of the goods constituted installation work as per the contract. Furthermore, the court needed to assess whether the defendant's conduct amounted to misleading and deceptive conduct under the Australian Consumer Law and whether the costs of receivership were indeed caused by such misrepresentations.

The court found that the parties had indeed agreed to the variation in the contract, obligating the buyer to procure forward exchange cover. However, this obligation was not fulfilled by the buyer, leading to a financial loss for the seller. The court also determined that the work done upon delivery was installation work as per the contract. Regarding the misleading and deceptive conduct claim, the court held that the defendant's misrepresentations did lead to unnecessary costs for the plaintiff. Therefore, the plaintiff was awarded damages for the breach of contract and for the costs incurred due to the misleading and deceptive conduct.

The court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of AUD $250,000 as compensation for the breach of contract and an additional AUD $50,000 for the costs incurred due to the misleading and deceptive conduct.