Fit College Pty Ltd v Styrud [2015] NSWCATAP 280

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Fit College Pty Ltd v Styrud [2015] NSWCATAP 280 Hearing dates: 27 November 2015 Date of orders: 22 December 2015 Decision date: 22 December 2015 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: M Dicker SC, Senior Member T Simon, Senior Member Decision: Appeal dismissed Catchwords: CONSUMER LAW – education provider – fitness studies – contract – term of contract for the assignment of a mentor and the provision of mentoring program – term of contract for the arrangement of practical experience – breaches of terms found by the Tribunal at first instance – held no error of law – leave refused for other grounds of appeal Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW) Cases Cited: Collins v Urban [2014] NSWCATAP 17 John Prendergast & Vanessa Prendergast v Western Murray Irrigation Limited [2014] NSWCATAP 69 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Fit College Pty Ltd (Appellant) Lisa Styrud (Respondent) File Number(s): AP 15/54376 Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Date of Decision: 17 September 2015 Before: J Lucy, Senior Member File Number(s): GEN 15/33596

Reasons for the DecIsion

Introduction 1. This appeal is against a decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Tribunal made on 17 September 2015. The date of lodgement of the Notice of Appeal was 29 September 2015. In the decision at first instance (the Decision), the Senior Member hearing the matter ordered the Appellant Fit College Pty Ltd (Fit College) to pay the Respondent Ms Lisa Styrud (Ms Styrud) $850 within seven days of the date of the decision. 2. Fit College is a company which runs a college which offers courses in fitness studies. A representative of Fit College was present at a fair in Martin Place in Sydney in February 2013, promoting the College, and met with Ms Styrud. He spoke about the courses offered by Fit College and provided Ms Styrud with a brochure. 3. In due course after receiving the brochure, Ms Styrud signed up online for the College's online Certificate III and IV courses in fitness on 19 March 2013. 4. After undertaking the courses in 2013-14, Ms Styrud made a number of allegations of breach of contract against Fit College in relation to the fitness online courses. 5. In the Senior Member's Decision at first instance, the Tribunal found that a contract was formed between Fit College and Ms Styrud when Ms Styrud accepted Fit College's offer of its services by enrolling in the two online courses Certificate III and IV in fitness. The Tribunal found that the contract included the following terms: 1. That all practical components of the course, including assessments would be arranged by the College; 2. That there was a campus in Manly at which Ms Styrud could attend workshops and go for practical study if she had any difficulties; 3. That the College was obliged to arrange Ms Styrud's practical experience and assessments with a qualified trainer or facility in her local area; and 4. That Ms Styrud would be assigned a mentor by the College under the College's mentor program. 1. Having found those terms, the Tribunal found that Fit College breached the contract in two ways. First, a breach was found by Fit College not assigning Ms Styrud a mentor pursuant to a mentor program established by the College. The second breach found by the Tribunal at first instance was that Fit College had not arranged Ms Styrud's practical experience with a qualified trainer or facility in her local area. The Senior Member however found that an alleged breach of contract requiring Fit College to arrange practical assessments was not substantiated although there had been some delay in arranging those assessments. 2. The Appellant seeks orders to have the orders made on 17 September 2015 set aside and Ms Styrud's application dismissed.