TANNER & TANNER

The parties to this proceeding were Tanner & Tanner (the applicant) and Tanner & Tanner (the respondent). The applicant sought to have a deed of settlement, entered into between the parties, set aside. The dispute concerned allegations of misleading and deceptive conduct and unconscionable conduct in relation to the negotiation and execution of the deed. The matter came before Foster J of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the court were whether the respondent had engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law, and whether the respondent had engaged in unconscionable conduct in contravention of section 21 of the Australian Consumer Law. The applicant also sought to establish that the deed was voidable due to these alleged contraventions.

Foster J considered the evidence presented by both parties regarding the circumstances surrounding the negotiation of the deed. His Honour analysed the representations made by the respondent and their potential to mislead or deceive the applicant. Furthermore, the court examined the conduct of the respondent in the context of the applicant's vulnerability and the overall bargaining process to determine if it amounted to unconscionable conduct. The principles of contract law and consumer protection legislation were applied to assess the validity of the deed.

The court ultimately found that the applicant had not established the necessary elements for misleading or deceptive conduct or unconscionable conduct. Consequently, the application to set aside the deed of settlement was dismissed.