Traderight (NSW) Pty Ltd (ACN 108 880 968) and Ors v Bank Of Queensland Limited (ACN 009 656 740) (No 10) and 15 related matters

The plaintiffs, Traderight (NSW) Pty Ltd and others, brought an action against the defendant, Bank of Queensland Limited, in relation to alleged misleading or deceptive conduct. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, General Division. The dispute centred on whether the bank had reasonable grounds for making certain representations regarding future matters, particularly in the context of financial products.

The legal issues that arose involved the admissibility of evidence pertaining to the bank's reasonable grounds for its representations. The plaintiffs sought to rely on deeming provisions from the Trade Practices Act 1974 and the Fair Trading Act, but did not respond to the defendant's specific plea regarding reasonable grounds. The court had to determine whether the evidence was relevant and admissible given the pleadings, and whether the "surprise rule" under the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 applied to prevent the introduction of the evidence.

The court found that the evidence concerning the bank's reasonable grounds was relevant to the issues as pleaded. It held that the deeming provisions did not preclude the introduction of this evidence. Furthermore, the court held that the "surprise rule" did not apply because the plaintiffs were already aware of the evidence through documents already served in the proceeding. The court emphasised that the qualifications and experience of an expert witness could be relevant in determining whether the bank had reasonable grounds for its representations.

The court's reasoning led to the conclusion that the evidence was admissible and relevant to the issues at hand. The final orders would likely reflect the court's decision on the admissibility of evidence and the application of the "surprise rule," paving the way for further proceedings regarding the merits of the alleged misleading or deceptive conduct.