Care Park Pty Ltd v Universal One Communication Pty Limited & Anor [2009] NSWSC 1405

Care Park Pty Ltd v Universal One Communication Pty Limited & Anor [2009] NSWSC 1405

The displayed terms were prominent and reasonable, so each time a servant or agent of the first defendant entered and parked a vehicle a contract arose on those terms. The first defendant breached the contracts on 70 occasions by failing to purchase and display valid tickets, and the contractual consequence was payment of $165 per unpaid notice after 60 days, producing $11,550 plus $779.63 interest. The non-payment and overstaying did not also make the defendants trespassers because the contract specified the monetary consequences and did not state that breach made the user a trespasser; trespass only arose after revocation on 28 January 2009, but damages for trespass were not sought in...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Supreme Court of New South Wales Common Law Division Proceeding by Summons Seeking Liquidated Damages, Trespass Damages and Injunctive Relief Arising From Use of a Car Park / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Verdict for the plaintiff against the first defendant for $12,329.63; verdict for the second defendant; each party to pay their or his own costs.
Legal Topics
['car Park Contractual Terms' 'liquidated Damages' 'trespass to Land' 'aggravated and Exemplary Damages' 'quia Timet Injunction' 'deregistered Corporation' 'costs Discretion']
['contract' 'tort' 'injunctions' 'costs' 'corporations'] ['car Park Contractual Terms' 'liquidated Damages' 'trespass to Land' 'aggravated and Exemplary Damages' 'quia Timet Injunction' 'deregistered Corporation' 'costs Discretion']

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

Supreme Court of New South Wales Common Law Division Proceeding by Summons Seeking Liquidated Damages, Trespass Damages and Injunctive Relief Arising From Use of a Car Park / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether users of the car park entered into contracts with the plaintiff on the displayed terms by entering and parking vehicles there.' 'Whether the first defendant breached those contracts on 70 occasions by failing to purchase and display parking tickets and became liable for liquidated damages and legal costs.' 'Whether the first or second defendant was liable in trespass for using the car park without paying or after revocation of permission.' 'Whether aggravated or exemplary damages could be awarded when not pleaded in the summons.' 'Whether an injunction should restrain the defendants from entering the George Street car park.' 'Whether orders could be made against the first defendant after deregistration and reinstatement.' 'Whether the plaintiff should recover costs despite commencing the proceeding in the Supreme Court.']

Ratio Decidendi

The displayed terms were prominent and reasonable, so each time a servant or agent of the first defendant entered and parked a vehicle a contract arose on those terms. The first defendant breached the contracts on 70 occasions by failing to purchase and display valid tickets, and the contractual consequence was payment of $165 per unpaid notice after 60 days, producing $11,550 plus $779.63 interest. The non-payment and overstaying did not also make the defendants trespassers because the contract specified the monetary consequences and did not state that breach made the user a trespasser; trespass only arose after revocation on 28 January 2009, but damages for trespass were not sought in...

Court Disposition

Verdict for the plaintiff against the first defendant for $12,329.63; verdict for the second defendant; each party to pay their or his own costs.

Orders

  • ['Verdict in favour of the plaintiff against the first defendant in the sum of $12,329.63.' 'Verdict in favour of the second defendant.' 'The parties are each to pay their or his own costs of these proceedings.']