GQ v M Ltd [2015] NZDT 1499 (30 April 2015) [pdf, 186 KB]
...Although misleading conduct need not be intentional to be actionable, the issues between the parties are CI0301_CIV_DCDT_Order Page 3 of 4 better understood as a failure to agree on a minimum term due to being at cross-purposes, rather than a matter of one party misleading the other to agree to a twelve-month term. What sum, if any, should GQ pay to M Ltd? 13. GQ argued that he did not get the results from the one month of Google AdWords that DN had led him to believe he would. H...