Geoff Conway v Clarke Traeger and Ors [2014] NSWCATCD 175
The trader made false and misleading representations regarding both the expected performance of the system and his affiliation, which misled the applicant to purchase the product. Compensation was calculated based on the difference between actual and represented savings, with future loss discounted pursuant to statute.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 19 September 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Consumer Claim / Final Decision
- Outcome
- Judgment for applicant against fourth respondent
- Legal Topics
- ['misrepresentation' 'misleading and Deceptive Conduct' 'consumer Remedies' 'assessment of Loss' 'costs in Tribunal Proceedings']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Consumer Claim / Final Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the trader made false and misleading representations as to potential savings from a solar PV system and his affiliation with a business' 'Whether the consumer is entitled to compensation for loss resulting from misleading and deceptive conduct']
Ratio Decidendi
The trader made false and misleading representations regarding both the expected performance of the system and his affiliation, which misled the applicant to purchase the product. Compensation was calculated based on the difference between actual and represented savings, with future loss discounted pursuant to statute.
Court Disposition
Judgment for applicant against fourth respondent
Orders
- ['The fourth respondent Clarke Traeger is to pay the applicant Geoff Conway the sum of $6133.89 on or before 24 September 2014.' 'All other claims are dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment