An inference as to the subject matter of a conversation falls far short of enabling an inference that misleading representations were made in that conversation. Where a party alleging misleading conduct under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act relies on spoken words, the Watson v Foxman principles require proof of the words spoken with a degree of precision sufficient to enable the court to be reasonably satisfied they were misleading, and an appellate court will not disturb a trial judge's credibility findings absent demonstrated error. A trial judge may direct that evidence of vital conversations be given orally rather than by affidavit.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.