Harvard Nominees Pty Ltd v Tiller (No 4)

• Jurisdiction: Australia Federal only
• Court: Federal Court
• Judgment Date: 16 February 2022
• Neutral Citation: [2022] FCA 105
• Date: 16 February 2022

Federal Court of Australia

Harvard Nominees Pty Ltd v Tiller (No 4) [2022] FCA 105

File number:	WAD 250 of 2019
Judgment of:	JACKSON J
Date of judgment:	16 February 2022
Catchwords:	PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - hearing on remitter from appeal - principles to be applied on remitter - interpretation of remitting judgment - extent to which an order setting aside dismissal of a claim allows that claim - issue estoppel - Anshun estoppel - whether issue should have been raised at appeal level ; CONSUMER LAW - misleading or deceptive conduct - remedies - statutory rescission relief sought under s 237 and s 243 of Australian Consumer Law - date of statutory rescission - relevance of date of statutory rescission to damages - date of statutory rescission to fulfil compensatory purpose - conditions on statutory rescission - unwinding of only part of a suite of transactions ; CONSUMER LAW - misleading or deceptive conduct - remedies - damages sought under s 236 of Australian Consumer Law - valuation of lost opportunity - discount for contingency - deductions bringing benefits received to account - onus of proof in relation to deductions ; PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - pre-judgment interest on damages - interest rate applicable
Legislation:	Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth) Schedule 2 (Australian Consumer Law) ss 2, 18, 236, 237, 243 Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 28, 51A Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) s 37 Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) ss 52, 87 Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 39.05 Fair Trading Act 2010 (WA) ss 19, 24
Cases cited:	Alati v Kruger (1955) 94 CLR 216 Awad v Twin Creeks Properties Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 200 Badenach v Calvert [2016] HCA 18; (2016) 257 CLR 440 Barnes v Forty Two International Pty Ltd [2014] FCAFC 152 Bennett v Elysium Noosa Pty Ltd (in liq) [2012] FCA 211; (2012) 202 FCR 72 Champtaloup v Thomas [1976] 2 NSWLR 264 Clone Pty Ltd v Players Pty Ltd (in liq) (rec & man apptd) [2018] HCA 12; (2018) 264 CLR 165 Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) v Pratt Holdings Pty Ltd [2005] FCA 1247 Community and Public Sector Union v Telstra Corporation Ltd (No 2) [2001] FCA 479; (2001) 112 FCR 324 Demagogue Pty Ltd v Ramensky (1992) 39 FCR 31 E K Nominees Pty Ltd v Woolworths Ltd [2006] NSWSC 1172 Fernando v Commonwealth of Australia [2014] FCAFC 181; (2014) 231 FCR 251 GEC Marconi Systems Pty Ltd v BHP Information Technology Pty Ltd [2003] FCA 688 Harvard Nominees Pty Ltd v Tiller (No 2) [2020] FCA 604 Harvard Nominees Pty Ltd v Tiller [2020] FCAFC 229; (2020) 282 FCR 530 Henjo Investments Pty Ltd v Collins Marrickville Pty Ltd (No 1) (1988) 39 FCR 546 I & L Securities Pty Ltd v HTW Valuers (Brisbane) Pty Ltd [2002] HCA 41; (2002) 210 CLR 109 Investments (WA) Pty Ltd v City of Swan [2012] WASC 278 JAD International Pty Ltd v International Trucks Australia Ltd (1994) 50 FCR 378 Kizbeau Pty Ltd v WG & B Pty Ltd (1995) 184 CLR 281 La Trobe Capital & Mortgage Corporation Ltd v Hay Property Consultants Pty Ltd [2011] FCAFC 4; (2011) 190 FCR 299 Management 3 Group Pty Ltd (in liq) v Lenny's Commercial Kitchens Pty Ltd (No 2) [2012] FCAFC 92; (2012) 203 FCR 283 Marks v GIO Australia Holdings Ltd (1998) 196 CLR 494 MBP (SA) Pty Ltd v Gogic (1991) 171 CLR 657 McAllister v Richmond Brewing Co (NSW) Pty Ltd (1942) 42 SR NSW 187 McCarthy v McIntyre [2000] FCA 1250 Metz Holdings Pty Ltd v Simmac Pty Ltd (No 2) [2011] FCA 981 Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Wang [2003] HCA 11; (2003) 215 CLR 518 Minter v Geraghty (1981) 38 ALR 68 Munchies Management Pty Ltd v Belperio (1988) 58 FCR 274 Murdock v Bettcher [2008] SASC 79 Murphy v Overton Investments Pty Ltd [2004] HCA 3; (2004) 216 CLR 388 R v Carroll [2010] NSWCCA 55; (2010) 77 NSWLR 45 Re The Spanish Club Ltd [2015] NSWSC 661 Re The Spanish Club Ltd [2015] NSWSC 1858 Roberts v Bass [2002] HCA 57; (2002) 212 CLR 1 Sellars v Adelaide Petroleum NL (1994) 179 CLR 332 Tenji v Henneberry & Associates Pty Ltd [2000] FCA 550; (2000) 98 FCR 324 Tomlinson v Ramsey Food Processing Pty Ltd [2015] HCA 28; (2015) 256 CLR 507 Tyco Australia Pty Ltd v Optus Networks Pty Ltd [2004] NSWCA 333 United States Surgical Corporation v Hospital Products International Pty Ltd [1983] 2 NSWLR 257 Western Australia v Russell [2009] WASCA 154
Division:	General Division
Registry:	Western Australia
National Practice Area:	Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area:	Commercial Contracts, Banking, Finance and Insurance
Number of paragraphs:	258
Date of hearing:	27-28 April 2021
Counsel for the Applicant:	Mr MC Hotchkin with Mr AW Buchan
Solicitor for the Applicant:	Hotchkin Hanly Lawyers
Counsel for the Respondents:	Mr M Cuerden SC with Mr A Freund
Solicitor for the Respondents:	Lawton Gillon

ORDERS

		WAD 250 of 2019
BETWEEN:	HARVARD NOMINEES PTY LTD (ACN 008 761 037) Applicant
AND:	SIMON CLIFFORD TILLER First Respondent ; DIMENSION AGRICULTURE PTY LTD Second Respondent ; GIOVANNI BASILIO NICOLETTI Third Respondent ; DAMIAN GLEN BRYCE Fourth Respondent ; FELICITY HELEN TILLER Fifth Respondent

order made by:	JACKSON J
DATE OF ORDER:	16 February 2022

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. Pursuant to s 237 and s 243(a) of the Australian Consumer Law, the following instruments made on 8 February 2019 are declared to have been void ab initio:

   1. Lease - Warriup between Harvard Nominees Pty Ltd, and Dimension Agriculture Pty Ltd and Simon Clifford Tiller; and

   2. Lease - Howick between Harvard Nominees Pty Ltd, and Dimension Agriculture Pty Ltd and Simon Clifford Tiller.

2. The first and second respondents jointly and severally must pay damages and pre‑judgment interest to the applicant in amounts to be determined in accordance with paragraph 3 of these orders.

3. By 4.00 pm AWST on 2 March 2022 the parties must file an agreed minute of calculation of damages and pre-judgment interest in accordance with the reasons for judgment or, failing agreement between them, separate minutes.

4. By 4.00 pm AWST 2 March 2022, the applicant must file and serve an outline of written submissions, no longer than five pages, in relation to the costs of the original proceeding and the costs of the remitter.

5. By 4.00 pm AWST on 16 March 2022, the respondents must...