Como Leather Pty Ltd v Kerr [2019] NSWCATAP 268

Como Leather Pty Ltd v Kerr [2019] NSWCATAP 268

The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal's reasons, read as a whole, met the minimum required standard; the allegedly omitted Satisfaction and Completion Notification was irrelevant to whether the table was made of the represented material; the appellant was not denied procedural fairness; and the weight-of-evidence ground did not establish a substantial miscarriage of justice warranting leave to appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal From a Decision of the Tribunal's Consumer and Commercial Division Concerning Misleading or Deceptive Conduct in the Sale of a Dining Table / Appeal Panel Decision; Leave to Appeal on Ground 3 Refused and Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Leave to appeal in relation to Ground 3 refused; appeal dismissed; stay lifted.
Legal Topics
['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'procedural Fairness' 'leave to Appeal' 'additional Evidence on Appeal']
['consumer Law' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'procedural Fairness' 'leave to Appeal' 'additional Evidence on 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

Appeal From a Decision of the Tribunal's Consumer and Commercial Division Concerning Misleading or Deceptive Conduct in the Sale of a Dining Table / Appeal Panel Decision; Leave to Appeal on Ground 3 Refused and Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal below gave adequate reasons for finding that the appellant made a misleading representation that the table was made of natural Italian marble.' 'Whether the appellant was denied procedural fairness in the hearing below.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted on the ground that the decision was against the weight of evidence.' 'Whether additional evidence tendered on the appeal should be admitted.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal's reasons, read as a whole, met the minimum required standard; the allegedly omitted Satisfaction and Completion Notification was irrelevant to whether the table was made of the represented material; the appellant was not denied procedural fairness; and the weight-of-evidence ground did not establish a substantial miscarriage of justice warranting leave to appeal.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal in relation to Ground 3 refused; appeal dismissed; stay lifted.

Orders

  • ['Stay of orders 1 and 2 of the Tribunal below made on 25 July 2019 is lifted.' 'Leave to appeal in relation to Ground 3 is refused.' 'Appeal dismissed.']