Weatherill v Bartlett [2017] NSWCA 175

Weatherill v Bartlett [2017] NSWCA 175

Dr Weatherill was not entitled to damages since he did not suffer loss; the value of the aircraft acquired exceeded the total amount paid. Costs do not contribute to the monetary threshold for appeal. No question of principle or error was demonstrated, and leave to appeal was refused.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal (and Appeal) / Court of Appeal, Leave Application and Determination of Competency of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed as incompetent; applicant to pay respondent's costs.
Legal Topics
['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'assessment of Damages' 'appeals' 'costs']
['consumer Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'assessment of Damages' 'appeals' 'costs']

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 (and Appeal) / Court of Appeal, Leave Application and Determination of Competency of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal is required under Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 101(2)(r)' 'Whether the applicant suffered compensable loss from misleading conduct under the Australian Consumer Law' 'Whether costs orders at first and second instance can contribute to monetary threshold for appeal' 'Whether principles from Marks v GIO Australia Holdings Ltd apply to the assessment of loss']

Ratio Decidendi

Dr Weatherill was not entitled to damages since he did not suffer loss; the value of the aircraft acquired exceeded the total amount paid. Costs do not contribute to the monetary threshold for appeal. No question of principle or error was demonstrated, and leave to appeal was refused.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed as incompetent; applicant to pay respondent's costs.

Orders

  • ['Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed.' 'Appeal dismissed as incompetent.' "Applicant/appellant pay the respondent's costs of the Summons and of the appeal, including the respondent's notice of motion filed 10 May 2017."]