Reference no: EM131623200

Tyler, a concert promoter, is promoting an Australian production of the musical show Galactica. Sunny, a young singer aged 18, attends an audition in Melbourne for the part of Heroa, the lead female rol. Tyler tells Sunny: "Ours will be a first-class production. We are in the process of signing Georgie Ripper, the famous American singer, for the male lead role. The show will be well advertised and will draw huge audiences."
After the audition, Tyler offers Sunny the part of Heroa. Sunny asks: "Are you sure that Georgie will take part?"

Tyler replies: "As far as we can tell, he is very interested."

Sunny then signs a contract to play the part of Heroa for a 2% share of the ticket sales. The contract contains all the usual terms for a contract of this type but does not mention Georgie Ripper. Tyler pays Sunny a $5,000 advance on her earnings.

One week later, Georgie Ripper informs Tyler that he has decided against taking a part in the Australian show. Tyler tells his Australian performers that Bruce Smith, a local singer, will now play the male lead and that the production will have to be considerably scaled down. This is bound to have an impact on the success of the show.

Sunny is disappointed and tells Tyler that she no longer wants to play the role of Heroa, but Tyler insists that she is contractually bound to perform.

1. If Sunny refused to attend rehearsals or do any performances, and Tyler sued to enforce the contract, would a court order Sunny to perform the part of Heroa in the show?

2. Can Sunny argue that it was an implied term of the contract that she would be playing opposite Georgie Ripper?

3. Can Sunny argue that the contract has been frustrated? If so, what would happen?

4. Can Sunny argue that the contract is voidable on grounds of unconscionable conduct?

5. Is Tyler guilty of misleading and deceptive conduct, as prohibited by s 18 of the ACL?