The High Court hearing in Kakavas v Crown Melbourne Limited commences tomorrow (4 April 2013).
The Court will consider the proper application of the equitable doctrine of unconscionable conduct (the claim was brought under s 51AA TPA – which now exists in virtually identical terms as s 20 of the Australian Consumer Law; this provision prohibits a corporation (acting in trade or commerce) from engaging in conduct that is unconscionable within the meaning of the unwritten law).
This case arose after Kakavas suffered gambling losses of almost $1.5 billion at Crown over a period of approximately 14 months. Kakavas alleged he suffered from a special disability, in the form of a gambling addiction, and that Crown unconscientiously took advantage of that disability. The trial judge rejected Kakavas’ claim, finding there was no relevant special disability. The Court of Appeal unanimously rejected an appeal by Kakavas. Kakavas sought, and was granted, special leave to appeal to the High Court in December 2012.
- View the High Court’s case page with copies of submissions and related material
- View my Kakavas v Crown page with case summaries/overviews and links (soon to be expanded)