Discuss contract terms regarding the supply of financial services.

The recommended structure of the essay is – (1) Common law unconscionable conduct + undue influence (MAIN FOCUS – Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio). (2) statutory unconscionable conduct (PARTICULARLY set out in ss 20, 21, 22 of the Australian Consumer Law…however, other sections in the Act are relevant. The ASIC Act may also be relevant as well as the Trade Practices Act which was subsumed by the ACL). Apply the law to the problem question with the aim of advising the prospective complainants of the strength of their case against the alleged guilty party. NB: the problem scenario is ALMOST identical to the facts in Commmercial Bank of Australia v Amadio. There are a few important exceptions – namely that the employee of the bank speaks the same language as the complainants and can understand the misrepresentations put to them. The number of sources required for this paper are inexhaustible. Below are the main recommended sources: Tanwar Enterprises Pty Ltd v Cauchi (2003) 217 CLR 315, [20]. Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio (1983) 151 CLR 447.Bloomely v Ryan (1956) 99 CLR 362, 405 and 415. Louth v Diprose (1992) 175 CLR 621 (‘Louth v Diprose’). ACCC v Radio Rentals Ltd (2005) 146 FCR, [169] (Finn J) Tonto Home Loans Australia Pty Ltd v Tvares [2011] NSWCA 389Kolbelt v ASIC [2019] 18Kakavas v Crown Pty Ltd 250 CLR 392