Hegarty v Pryor [2022] NSWCATCD 206

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Hegarty v Pryor [2022] NSWCATCD 206 Hearing dates: 29 September 2022 Date of orders: 14 December 2022 Decision date: 14 December 2022 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: K Ross, Senior Member Decision: 1. Brett Pryor and Leith Pryor are, on or before 11 January 2023, at a time to be agreed between the parties, to collect the horse Chesapeake Hudson from the applicant. 2. Brett Pryor and Leith Pryor are, on or before 11 January 2023, to pay to the applicant the sum of $18313.00. Catchwords: CONSUMER CLAIM: Where applicant alleges that respondents made a misleading representation, Where the applicant alleges horse has ridden vices not disclosed to her, and is not fit for the purpose disclosed Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Fair Trading Act 1989 The Australian Consumer Law Texts Cited: The Law of Misleading or Deceptive Conduct 5ed / Colin Lockhart (2019), Chatswood, N.S.W. LexisNexis Butterworths Category: Principal judgment Parties: Felicity Hegarty (Applicant)

Brett Pryor and Leith Pryor (Respondents) Representation: Parties in person File Number(s): GEN 22/30650 Publication restriction: Nil

REASONS FOR DECISION

Application 1. On 26 January 2022 the applicant Ms Hegarty purchased a 5-year-old gelding Chesapeake Hudson ("Hudson") from the respondents Mr and Mrs Pryor for the sum of $15000. The applicant alleges that Hudson is not the "kind, easy-going" gelding which he was represented to be, because he displays ridden vices (broncing, and a tendency to want to buck). She seeks to return him and obtain a refund of the purchase price together with compensation. 2. The respondents oppose the orders sought. They say that Hudson did not display the behaviours now complained of during the 5 years he was with them. They stand by the representations which they made to the applicant at the time of the sale.