van Heythuysen v Ashfield Vehicles Pty Ltd t/as Cars by the Park [2016] NSWCATAP 162

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: van Heythuysen v Ashfield Vehicles Pty Ltd t/as Cars by the Park [2016] NSWCATAP 162 Hearing dates: 30 June 2016 Date of orders: 25 July 2016 Decision date: 25 July 2016 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: M Harrowell, Principal Member S Thode, Senior Member Decision: (1) Leave to appeal is refused; and (2) The appeal is otherwise dismissed. Catchwords: Leave to appeal- inferences available on evidence, Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Cases Cited: Collins v Urban [2014] NSWCATAP 17 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Principal judgment Parties: Rex Van Heythuysen (Appellant) Ashfield Vehicles Pty Ltd t/as Cars (Respondent) Representation: Appellant: B Simon (Counsel) Respondent: W Russell (Director) File Number(s): AP 16/19471 Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Citation: Not applicable Date of Decision: 1 February 2016 Before: C Paull, Senior Member File Number(s): MV 15/61276

reasons for decision

Introduction 1. This is an appeal in respect of a decision of the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Tribunal in respect of motor vehicle list matter MV 15/61276 (Original Application). 2. The applicant in the Original Application had purchased a 2000 model VW Passat from the respondent on 12 February 2015. The purchase price for the vehicle was $5,400.00. 3. The application was heard on 1 February 2016. At that time the appellant sought an award in his favour in the sum of $7,197.99. This amount comprised a refund for the purchase price of the vehicle namely $5,400.00 and damages of $551.00, the balance of the claim being for his costs of prosecuting the claim. 4. On 1 February 2016 the Tribunal published reasons for decision (Decision). The Tribunal made the following orders: 1. The respondent is to pay the applicant $113.98 by 15 February 2016. 2. The application is otherwise dismissed 1. The award made by the Tribunal for $113.98 was the amount claimed by the appellant for a defective window screen wash pump, an item in the vehicle which failed on the date of purchase. The Tribunal noted that the respondent conceded the sum and otherwise disputed the appellant's claims.