Smith v Middleton [2019] NSWCATCD 54

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Smith v Middleton [2019] NSWCATCD 54 Hearing dates: 9 November 2018, 27 February 2019 Date of orders: 20 June 2019 Decision date: 20 June 2019 Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Before: S Hanstein, General Member Decision: The application is dismissed. Legislation Cited: Australian Consumer Law (NSW) Cases Cited: Safi v Heartland Motors Pty Ltd t/as Heartland Chrysler [2016] NSWCATAP 80; Chen v Homeland Furniture Canterbury Pty Ltd [2015] NSWCATCD 102 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Graham and Sandra Smith (applicants) Lester John Royce Middleton (first respondent) Opalite Industries Pty Ltd T/A Opalite Caravans (second respondent) Representation: Mr Smith for the applicants Mr Middleton in person Mr McKensey for the second File Number(s): MV 18/30033 Publication restriction: Nil

reasons for decision 1. The applicants are husband and wife. I have referred to them below jointly as "the applicant" or, where necessary to distinguish between them, as "Mr Smith" or "Mrs Smith" as relevant. 2. The applicant seeks a refund for, and compensation for consequential loss in respect of, a new Opalite Skoot 5800 caravan purchased from the second respondent ("Opalite"). The first respondent ("Mr Middleton") is a director of the second respondent, and acted on behalf of the Opalite in Opalite's dealings with the applicant. 3. The applicant was represented at the hearing by Mr Smith, and it is he who had the relevant dealings with Opalite. Mr Smith gave oral evidence, and relied on evidence of Colin Young. The applicant also relied upon documentary evidence. Mr Middleton appeared at the hearing and Opalite was represented by Mr McKensey. The respondents relied upon documentary evidence and oral evidence from Mr Middleton and Ron May.