Flaherty v Consumer Claims Tribunal & Ors [2000] NSWSC 264

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Flaherty v Consumer Claims Tribunal & Ors [2000] NSWSC 264 FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 30043/98 HEARING DATE(S) : 16 July 1999 JUDGMENT DATE : 6 April 2000

Brian Peter Flaherty - Plaintiff Consumer Claims Tribunal - First Defendant PARTIES : New System Brick Veneering Pty Limited - Second Defendant Brick Wizard Pty Limited - Third Defendant Leonard Ali - Fourth Defendant JUDGMENT OF : Hulme J at 1

COUNSEL : C Freeman - Plaintiff Ex parte SOLICITORS : Greenaway & Tohme - Plaintiff DECISION : See paragraph 48

- 2 - IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES COMMON LAW DIVISION

NO: 30043/98 Thursday, 6 April 2000

HULME J Brian Peter FLAHERTY v CONSUMER CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NEW SYSTEM BRICK VENEERING PTY LIMITED, BRICK WIZARD PTY LIMITED, LEONARD ALI JUDGMENT

1 HIS HONOUR: By Summons filed on 29 April 1998 the Plaintiff seeks the following orders:- 1. Declarations pursuant to section 12(2)(b) of the Consumer Claims Tribunal Act that the First Defendant:- (i) in making an order on 24 April 1996 in favour of the Plaintiff in respect of matter no BPA 95/243 made a final order pursuant to section 34 of the Act. (ii) A declaration pursuant to section 12(2)(b) of the Act that the First Defendant, in permitting the purported application of Kenneth John McInnes (not a party) dated 9 May 1996 to renew the claim lacked the jurisdiction to do so, or alternatively, denied natural justice to the Plaintiff. (iii) A declaration pursuant to section 12(2)(b) of the Act that the First Defendant in making an order on 29 May 1996 lacked jurisdiction to do so. (iv) A declaration pursuant to section 12(2)(b) of the Act that the First Defendant in making an order on 31 July 1996 lacked jurisdiction to do so. (v) A declaration pursuant to section 12(2)b) of the Act that the First Defendant in permitting the purported application of The Brick Wizard Pty Ltd (the Third Defendant) dated 30 January 1997 to renew the claim lacked the jurisdiction to do so or alternatively denied natural justice to the Plaintiff. (vi) A declaration pursuant to section 12(2)(b) of the Act that the First Defendant in making orders on 23 July 1997 lacked jurisdiction to do so or alternatively denied natural justice to the Plaintiff. (vii) A declaration pursuant to section 12(2)(b) of the Act that the First Defendant, in making orders on 4 September, 1997, lacked jurisdiction to do so, or alternatively, denied natural justice to the Plaintiff. (viii) A declaration pursuant to section 12(2)(b) of the Act that the First Defendant, in permitting the purported application of New System Brick Veneering Pty Ltd (the Second Defendant) dated 6 January 1998 to renew the claim, lacked the jurisdiction to do so, or alternatively denied natural justice to the Plaintiff. 2. Orders setting aside the orders of the First Defendant in claim no. BPA95/243 except the order dated 24 April 1996. 3. An order remitting the matter to the First Defendant to be re-heard according to law. 2 There were also prayers for other relief and for costs. 3 According to the Plaintiff, on 7 June 1995 he entered into an oral agreement "subject only to price" with a Mr McInnes on behalf of the Second Defendant for the cutting of bricks to be supplied to him and for the installation of the cut bricks as a brick veneering system at his residence. On the following day he received, via a Mr Wignall, a builder who was carrying out other work for the Plaintiff, a proposal in the following terms:-