Exclusive
Mirvac set for Golden tower showdown
Nelson Yap & Kathryn O’Meara
October 06, 2004

Angry investors and purchasers of apartments at Mirvac’s fifth tower at Melbourne Docklands are preparing for a landmark legal battle over alleged misleading and deceptive conduct by the listed developer.

Law firm Jerrard & Stuk yesterday confirmed to propertyreview.com.au that it has around 15 purchasers at Mirvac’s so-called Golden tower, who intend fighting the development group over misrepresentation matters regarding the fifth tower at its Yarra’s Edge development.

The tower, which has been promoted as the ultimate tower at Mirvac’s Docklands, is due for settlement late next month.

However, according to Jerrard & Stuck associate Daniel Oldham his firm has 15 purchasers at tower five who allege Mirvac has misled them.

The matter is set to become another major legal battle for the respected developer in regards to issues of misrepresentation and misleading and deceptive conduct.

Oldham said issues raised by buyers of tower five come under the Trade Practices Act sections 51, 52, 53 and 82.

“Principle complaints by buyers are valuation issues, lack of promised infrastructure and the missing marina,” Oldham said.

Oldham added that another serious issue was the colour of the glass tower, which was according to the company’s brochures and advertisements gold in colour.

One buyer, who contacted propertyreview.com.au last week complained: “The glass is a totally different colour to what was promised in the brochure. It was supposed to be a golden tower and it is poo-brown.”

“There is no way I am settling. It is total misrepresentation,” he said. “The brochure was this amazing golden thing two feet long with magnificent representations of this beautiful golden glass tower. It has turned out nothing like what they promised!”

Jerrard & Stuk have become many developers worst nightmare and investors and ‘owner occupiers’ best friend tackling such issues as misleading and deceptive conduct; and questionable valuations.

Recently, the Supreme Court of Victoria rejected a Mirvac appeal against a Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal decision, which found in favour of Docklands purchaser Peter Philp. The Supreme Court found that the contract signed by the Jerrard & Stuk client fell under the Domestic Building Contracts Act and was not enforceable as the deposit paid was in excess of the 5% stipulated under the Act.

The Supreme Court rejected Mirvac’s argument sending both parties back to VCAT were the matter was to be reheard, however, Mirvac has appealed Justice Byrne’s decision.

The Supreme Court of Appeal will hear the matter on 15 October.

The Victorian government has since retrospectively changed the legislation to close a loop hole in “off-the-plan” contracts.