Pratten v Johns [2010] NSWSC 327

Pratten v Johns [2010] NSWSC 327

Leave to appeal was refused because the issues sought to be raised were not pleaded below, the magistrate was not required to consider unpleaded matters, and there was no evidence of factual reliance by Mr Pratten on the alleged misrepresentations to establish misleading and deceptive conduct in breach of s 42 of the Fair Trading Act 1987.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Judgment on Leave Application
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
['misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'pleadings' 'proof of Debt' 'leave to Appeal']
['contract Law' 'trade and Commerce' 'civil Procedure'] ['misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'pleadings' 'proof of Debt' 'leave to Appeal']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal / Judgment on Leave Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted pursuant to Section 40 of the Local Court Act 2007' 'Whether the magistrate erred in failing to consider and determine the accuracy of the amount owing' 'Whether misleading and deceptive conduct in breach of s 42 of the Fair Trading Act 1987 was established']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the issues sought to be raised were not pleaded below, the magistrate was not required to consider unpleaded matters, and there was no evidence of factual reliance by Mr Pratten on the alleged misrepresentations to establish misleading and deceptive conduct in breach of s 42 of the Fair Trading Act 1987.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is refused.' "The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs."]