Stockland (Constructors) Pty Ltd v Retail Design Group (International) Pty Ltd

Stockland (Constructors) Pty Ltd (the applicant) sought leave to appeal from a decision of the primary judge in proceedings against Retail Design Group (International) Pty Ltd (the respondent). The dispute concerned allegations of misleading and deceptive conduct in contravention of the *Trade Practices Act 1974* (Cth).

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether representations made in connection with court proceedings could constitute conduct "in trade or commerce" for the purposes of the *Trade Practices Act*, and whether it was necessary for the plaintiff to prove that it had been misled by the conduct. The applicant also sought leave to amend its pleadings to introduce new allegations.

The Court of Appeal considered that the proposed amendments lacked the necessary clarity and that the underlying claim, as advanced, was unlikely to succeed. The court reasoned that representations made in the context of litigation, particularly concerning the conduct of those proceedings, were generally not considered to be conduct "in trade or commerce" within the meaning of the Act. Furthermore, the court indicated that for a claim of misleading or deceptive conduct to be made out, it was generally required that the party alleging the contravention must have been misled or deceived.

Leave to appeal was refused, and the applicant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.