NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Ilhan v Cvitanovic [2009] NSWSC 479
HEARING DATE(S) : 22/05/09
JUDGMENT DATE : 22 May 2009
JURISDICTION : Equity
JUDGMENT OF : White J
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE : 22 May 2009
DECISION : 1. Order in accordance with paras 1 and 2 of the originating process; 2. Defendant pay the plaintiffs' costs; 3. Exhibits may be returned after 28 days.
CATCHWORDS : CORPORATIONS - winding up - appeal from liquidator's rejection of proof of debt - hearing de novo - SALE OF GOODS - conditions and warranties - implied conditions and warranties - plaintiffs made known to company the purpose for which they required goods so as to show that they relied on the company's skill or judgment - breach of implied warranty as to fitness for purpose
LEGISLATION CITED : Sale of Goods Act 1923 (NSW) Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth)
CATEGORY : Principal judgment
Ilhan v Cvitanovic [2009] NSWSC 160; (2009) 69 ACSR 702 Watson v Foxman (1995) 49 NSWLR 315 CASES CITED : Mead v Watson [2005] NSWCA 133; (2005) 23 ACLC 718 Re Mendarma Pty Ltd (In Liq) (No. 2) [2007] NSWSC 99; (2007) 25 ACLC 193 Silvia v Brodyn Pty Ltd [2007] NSWCA 55; (2007) 25 ACLC 385
TEXTS CITED : Kenneth Sutton, Sales and Consumer Law, 4th ed (1995)
PARTIES : S Semih Ilhan & Anor v Daniel I Cvitanovic
FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 4597/08
COUNSEL : Plaintiffs: R J Brender & J Wilcsek Defendant: Ms K Watson (solicitor)
SOLICITORS : Plaintiffs: Forbes Dowling Lawyers Defendant: Meehans Solicitors
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate