Lana Lien v Brarny Pty Limited trading as Sydney Prestige Motors & BMW Australia Limited [2014] NSWCATCD 207

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Lana Lien v Brarny Pty Limited trading as Sydney Prestige Motors & BMW Australia Limited [2014] NSWCATCD 207 Hearing dates: 24 June 201430 September 2014 Decision date: 11 November 2014 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: P. Boyce, Senior Member Decision: Application is dismissed Catchwords: Acceptable quality, liquidation of dealer, manufacturer liability Legislation Cited: Consumer Claims Act 1998 Australian Consumer Law Corporations Act 2001 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Lana Lien (applicant) Brarny Pty Limited trading as Sydney Prestige Motors & BMW Australia Limited (respondent) Representation: Applicant in person Second respondent by its authorised agent at hearing and submissions by Mills Oakley Solicitors: First respondent: McBride Harle & Martin File Number(s): MV 14/08912 Publication restriction: Unrestricted

REASONS FOR DECISION 1. The applicant is a consumer within the meaning of Section 3 of the Consumer Claims Act 1998. 2. The applicant brings this application against the first respondent, Brarny Pty Ltd trading as Sydney Prestige Motors and the second respondent BMW Australia Limited as suppliers within the meaning of s 3 of the Act. 3. The application falls within the definition of "consumer claim" under Section 3A of the Consumer Claims Act 1998. 4. The cause of action arose within the 3 years prior to the commencement of proceedings, and the claim is in respect of a used motor vehicle for private use and the claim is for less than $30,000.00. 5. The Tribunal is satisfied that it has jurisdiction under s 7 of the Consumer Claims Act 1998. 6. The orders sought by the applicant are within the orders available under s 8(1)(a) of the Act. 7. This is an application by a consumer applicant for a refund of the purchase price of a motor vehicle plus damages from the supplier first respondent or second respondent because the supplier has failed to comply with the consumer guarantee contained in s 54 of the Australian Consumer Law ("ACL"). 8. The applicant also alleges liability by s 271 of the ACL on the part of the second respondent, the manufacturer of the motor vehicle as the first respondent has failed to comply with the consumer guarantee contained in s 54 of the ACL. 9. The goods supplied to the applicant are a used 2008 model Mini Cooper S registered for private use which the applicant purchased from Sydney Prestige Motors on 7 September 2012.