Taylor v Lay [2023] NSWCATCD 66

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Taylor v Lay [2023] NSWCATCD 66 Hearing dates: 5 April 2023 Date of orders: 19 June 2023 (amended 8 August 2023) Decision date: 19 June 2023 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: S Sutherland, General Member Decision: Pursuant to Section 63 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, orders published on 19 June 2023 are amended as follows: 1. The respondent, Courtney Lay is to pay, the applicant, Ruby Taylor, the sum of $4,365.25 on or before 26-Jun-2023. 2. The respondent, Courtney Lay is to pay the applicant, Ruby Taylor, costs in the sum of $1,418.12 on or before 26-Jun-2023. 3. All other claims are dismissed. Catchwords: CONSUMER CLAIM – Dog- Puppy – Misleading and deceptive conduct - Not of acceptable quality – Fit for purpose – Major Failure – Election not to reject and obtain a refund - Duty to Mitigate – Damages – reasonably foreseeable - Costs Legislation Cited: Fair Trading Act, 1987; Part 6A Australian Consumer Law (NSW); ss 18, 54,259, 263 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act, 2017; s 60 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules, 2014; r 38 Cases Cited: Concrete Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd v Nelson [1990] HCA 17; (190) 169 CLR 594 Bank of N.S.W. v. The Commonwealth [1948] HCA 7; (1948) 76 CLR 1 O'Brien v. Smolonogov (1983) 53 ALR 107 Commissioner of Taxation v. Whitfords Beach Pty. Ltd. [1982] HCA 8; (1982) 150 CLR 355 Williams v Pisano [2015] NSWCA 177 Hadley v Baxendale [1854] EngR 296; (1854) 9 Ex 341 Leeda Projects v Zeng (2020) 61 VR 384; [2020] VSCA 192 C Czarnikow Limited v Koufos [1969] 1 AC 350 Texts Cited: SG Corones, The Australian Consumer Law, 3rd ed, Thomson Reuters, 2016. Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ruby Taylor (applicant) Courtney Lay (respondent) Representation: Applicant (self-represented) Respondent (self-represented) File Number(s): GEN 22/53831 Publication restriction: Nil