Bartlett v Weatherill [2017] NSWSC 31

Bartlett v Weatherill [2017] NSWSC 31

Dr Weatherill did not suffer actual loss, as the Cessna 400 acquired in reliance on the misleading conduct was worth more than the sum paid; damages under s 236 of the Australian Consumer Law are not recoverable absent actual loss.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Clinton Garth Bartlett; Respondent: Dr Colin Weatherill
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed, Magistrate's judgment set aside, judgment entered in favour of Bartlett, costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Assessment of Damages, Actual Loss, Australian Consumer Law S 18 and S 236, Judicial Review of Local Court Decisions
Consumer Law Damages Administrative Law Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Assessment of Damages Actual Loss Australian Consumer Law S 18 and S 236 Judicial Review of Local Court Decisions

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Clinton Garth Bartlett

Appellant

Dr Colin Weatherill

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dr Weatherill suffered actual loss as a result of misleading or deceptive conduct in breach of s 18 of the Australian Consumer Law
  2. 2 Proper measure of damages under s 236 of the Australian Consumer Law where the value of acquired property exceeds the amount paid

Ratio Decidendi

Dr Weatherill did not suffer actual loss, as the Cessna 400 acquired in reliance on the misleading conduct was worth more than the sum paid; damages under s 236 of the Australian Consumer Law are not recoverable absent actual loss.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, cross-appeal dismissed, Magistrate's judgment set aside, judgment entered in favour of Bartlett, costs reserved.

Orders

  • Allow the appeal in the summons filed on 29 July 2016.
  • Dismiss the cross-appeal in the cross-summons filed on 13 September 2016.