Simper & Anor v KvB Visual Concepts Pty Limited [2000] NSWSC 677

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Simper & Anor v KvB Visual Concepts Pty Limited [2000] NSWSC 677 FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 011014/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 03/07/2000 JUDGMENT DATE : 13 July 2000

PARTIES : Kenneth James Simper and Samantha Simper - Plaintiffs KvB Visual Concepts Pty Limited - Defendant JUDGMENT OF : Bell J at 1

LOWER COURT Local Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 13068/98 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER :

COUNSEL : A Gelbart - Plaintiffs A Ogborne - Defendant SOLICITORS : Peter C Prior & Co - Plaintiffs Foulsham & Geddes - Defendant DECISION : Appeal dismissed

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

BELL J

Thursday 13 July, 2000 11014/00 - Kenneth James SIMPER & Anor v KvB Visual Concepts Pty Limited

JUDGMENT

1 HER HONOUR: This is an appeal brought pursuant to s 69(2) of the Local Courts (Civil Claims) Act, 1970 from the whole of the decision of Mr Price, Magistrate, given on 29 February 2000 upon grounds set out in a document which forms an annexure to the plaintiffs' summons. 2 On 29 February 2000 the learned Magistrate entered a verdict in favour of the defendant (the plaintiff in the proceedings below) in the amount of $9,246.06 together with interest. 3 On or about 22 September 1994, the plaintiff, Samantha Simper, sought to enrol in a degree course offered by the defendant College. She completed an enrolment form on that day in respect of the Bachelor of Arts (Visual Communication) course. The course was a four year one. Ms Simper enrolled in that course upon an understanding that she might complete it at an accelerated rate. In fact she completed all requirements for admission to the degree in three years. 4 In a document annexed to the summons filed on behalf of the plaintiffs, eight grounds of appeal are set out. At the commencement of the hearing, Mr Gelbart informed me that the plaintiffs confined their appeal to grounds 1 and 3. Those grounds are as follows:- 1. By failing to find that the contract between the appellant and respondent of about September/October 1994 had been fully performed by the appellant and that thereby the appellant was discharged from any further obligation to the respondent. … 3. By finding that the contract of September/October 1994 between the appellants and the respondent contained a condition that the appellants would pay a fourth year of tuition.