The Watson v Foxman standard for proving oral representations alleged to constitute misleading and deceptive conduct does not impose an inflexible requirement for proof of the precise words used; proof of the substance and effect of the words may suffice. However, where objective probability and credibility findings undermine the plaintiff's evidence of what was conveyed, the claim will fail. A contractual provision for legal costs on a solicitor-client basis is equivalent to indemnity costs under the UCPR by operation of s 133(b) of the Supreme Court of Queensland Act 1991 and s 743S of the UCPR. A guarantee entitling the creditor to exercise remedies simultaneously, contemporaneously, or successively precludes a stay of execution pending realisation of security.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.