WRIGHT v Norris Real Estate Pty Ltd

The applicant, Mr. Wright, brought proceedings against the respondent, Norris Real Estate Pty Ltd, in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT). Mr. Wright sought to recover a deposit paid under a contract for the sale of land, alleging that the respondent, acting as the seller's agent, had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct in contravention of the *Australian Consumer Law* (ACL). Specifically, Mr. Wright contended that the respondent had misrepresented the property's zoning status, leading him to enter into the contract.

QCAT was required to determine whether the respondent had engaged in misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of section 18 of the ACL. This involved assessing whether the representations made by the respondent regarding the property's zoning were false or misleading, and whether Mr. Wright had relied on these representations to his detriment when purchasing the property. The Tribunal also had to consider whether the respondent's conduct caused loss or damage to Mr. Wright.

Judge Riethmuller found that the respondent had indeed engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct. The Tribunal was satisfied that the agent had made representations about the property's zoning that were not supported by the available evidence and that these representations were likely to mislead a reasonable consumer. The court applied the principles of section 18 of the ACL, focusing on the objective likelihood of deception or misleading conduct, and concluded that Mr. Wright had relied on these representations when deciding to purchase the property. The Tribunal found that the respondent's conduct had caused Mr. Wright to suffer loss.

Consequently, QCAT ordered that Norris Real Estate Pty Ltd pay Mr. Wright the sum of $20,000, representing the deposit paid under the contract, together with interest and costs.