› COMPETITION, FAIR TRADING AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
› MISLEADING OR DECEPTIVE CONDUCT
› FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENTS
› where the plaintiffs entered into a franchise agreement for a Michel’s Patisserie to be located in Townsville
› where the plaintiffs allege that oral and written representations were made on behalf of the franchisor which they relied upon
› representations as to future matters
› whether representations were misleading
Trade and Commerce
› COMPETITION, FAIR TRADING AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
› MISLEADING OR DECEPTIVE CONDUCT
› FALSE REPRESENTATIONS
› FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENTS
› PUFFERY
› where the representations were as to the kinds of products which would be available for sale by a franchisee, the reliability and frequency of the supply of those products from Brisbane to Townsville, and the quality and condition of the products upon their receipt in Townsville
› whether the representations are mere puffery
Trade and Commerce
› CONSUMER PROTECTION
› MISLEADING OR DECEPTIVE CONDUCT
› NON-DISCLOSURES
› where the plaintiffs allege material non-disclosures - whether the defendants were aware of facts which were not disclosed to the plaintiffs
› whether there was an objectively reasonable expectation on the part of the plaintiffs that those facts would be disclosed
Trade and Commerce
› CONSUMER PROTECTION
› MISLEADING OR DECEPTIVE CONDUCT
› LOSS AND DAMAGE
› NO TRANSACTION CASE
› losses of first plaintiff associated with entry into the franchise agreement
› loss of income of second plaintiffs consequential on the first plaintiff entering into the franchise agreement
Case Details
Citation[2019] QDC 11
CourtQDC
JurisdictionQueensland
Unlock so much more with Barrister AI
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
