Stellino v Bunnings Group Limited [2024] NSWCATAP 124

Stellino v Bunnings Group Limited [2024] NSWCATAP 124

Leave was granted and the appeal allowed because the accepted and uncontested evidence overwhelmingly established that the damage occurred shortly after application of the product to multiple surfaces, that there was nothing wrong with the home or surfaces, that Mr Stellino followed the instructions, that similar damage was replicated on pots, and that prior professional pest treatments had not caused damage. The Tribunal's contrary causation conclusion was against the weight of evidence and central to dismissal. On substituting its own decision, the Appeal Panel found that a surface spray intended for indoor and outdoor domestic surfaces which caused such damage when applied normally was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal Under S 80(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw) From a Consumer and Commercial Division Consumer Claim Decision / Appeal Panel Decision on Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; Tribunal order dismissing the application set aside; substituted order requiring Bunnings Group Limited to pay Ben Graziano Stellino $13,460 within 14 days.
Legal Topics
['consumer Guarantees' 'acceptable Quality' 'weight of Evidence' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'consumer Claims Compensation']
['consumer Law' 'civil and Administrative Appeals'] ['consumer Guarantees' 'acceptable Quality' 'weight of Evidence' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'consumer Claims Compensation']

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

Internal Appeal Under S 80(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (nsw) From a Consumer and Commercial Division Consumer Claim Decision / Appeal Panel Decision on Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted on the basis that the Tribunal decision was against the weight of evidence or because significant new evidence had arisen.' "Whether the evidence established that the pesticide product caused or contributed to damage to the exterior surfaces of Mr Stellino's home." 'Whether Bunnings breached the guarantee as to acceptable quality in s 54 of the Australian Consumer Law 2010 (NSW).' 'Whether Mr Stellino was entitled to damages for reasonably foreseeable loss under s 259(4) of the ACL and the amount of that loss.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted and the appeal allowed because the accepted and uncontested evidence overwhelmingly established that the damage occurred shortly after application of the product to multiple surfaces, that there was nothing wrong with the home or surfaces, that Mr Stellino followed the instructions, that similar damage was replicated on pots, and that prior professional pest treatments had not caused damage. The Tribunal's contrary causation conclusion was against the weight of evidence and central to dismissal. On substituting its own decision, the Appeal Panel found that a surface spray intended for indoor and outdoor domestic surfaces which caused such damage when applied normally was...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; Tribunal order dismissing the application set aside; substituted order requiring Bunnings Group Limited to pay Ben Graziano Stellino $13,460 within 14 days.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is granted.' 'The appeal is allowed.' 'The order made by the Tribunal on 12 March 2024 in 2023/00367880 is set aside and in substitution thereof the following order is made: Bunnings Group Limited is to pay Ben Graziano Stellino the sum of $13,460 within 14 days of the date of publication of these...