DaimlerChrysler Services Australia P/L v Berckelman & Anor [2004] NSWSC 447

DaimlerChrysler Services Australia P/L v Berckelman & Anor [2004] NSWSC 447

The Tribunal Member's conclusion that a reasonable person making an objective determination would find that the credit was in fact to be applied wholly or predominantly for personal, domestic or household purposes was open on the evidence, including the private registration and tax records, so no error of law was shown. The explanation for the late filing was accepted and an extension of time was granted, but the Tribunal decision was affirmed and the appeal dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Decision Under S 67 of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Act 2001 (nsw) / Final Determination of Appeal and Amended Summons; Extension of Time to File Appeal Granted
Outcome
The Tribunal decision was affirmed; the appeal and amended summons were dismissed; the plaintiff was ordered to pay the respondent's costs as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
['appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal' 'consumer Credit Code Application' 'declaration of Business Purpose' 'jurisdiction' 'error of Law' 'extension of Time']
['administrative Law' 'consumer Credit' 'contract Law'] ['appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal' 'consumer Credit Code Application' 'declaration of Business Purpose' 'jurisdiction' 'error of Law' 'extension of Time']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Decision Under S 67 of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Act 2001 (nsw) / Final Determination of Appeal and Amended Summons; Extension of Time to File Appeal Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal Member erred in law in applying s 11(3) of the Consumer Credit Code to find the declaration of business purpose ineffective.' "Whether the Tribunal Member failed to give proper weight to the respondent's declaration under s 11(2) of the Consumer Credit Code." 'Whether there was evidence upon which the Tribunal Member could find that the credit was to be applied wholly or predominantly for personal, domestic or household purposes.' 'Whether time to file the appeal should be extended.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal Member's conclusion that a reasonable person making an objective determination would find that the credit was in fact to be applied wholly or predominantly for personal, domestic or household purposes was open on the evidence, including the private registration and tax records, so no error of law was shown. The explanation for the late filing was accepted and an extension of time was granted, but the Tribunal decision was affirmed and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

The Tribunal decision was affirmed; the appeal and amended summons were dismissed; the plaintiff was ordered to pay the respondent's costs as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • ['The decision of R Connolly dated 29 August 2003 is affirmed.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' 'The amended summons is dismissed.' "The plaintiff is to pay the respondent's costs as agreed or assessed."]