Li v Heriot Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATAP 177

Li v Heriot Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATAP 177

The appeal was dismissed as there was no evidence that the lessor or its solicitors possessed the amended or revised amended disclosure statements prior to execution of the lease or guarantee, nor was there evidence of reliance by the appellant on the lessor's conduct regarding the existence of a separate electricity meter. Consequently, there was no misleading or deceptive conduct or entitlement to relief under s 18 of the ACL.

Parties
Appellant: Jian Ming (Samuel) Li; Respondent: Heriot Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Determination of Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Retail Leases, Leases and Tenancies, Misleading or Deceptive Conduct, Guarantee, Disclosure Statements
Commercial Law Tenancy Law Retail Leases Leases and Tenancies Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Guarantee Disclosure Statements

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jian Ming (Samuel) Li

Appellant

Heriot Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Determination of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in its findings regarding the lessor's disclosure statement and representations about a separate electricity meter.
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in failing to find that the amended disclosure statements were within the knowledge and possession of the lessor prior to execution of the guarantee.
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in failing to find reliance by the appellant on amended disclosure statements or representations by the lessor regarding a separate electricity meter.

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed as there was no evidence that the lessor or its solicitors possessed the amended or revised amended disclosure statements prior to execution of the lease or guarantee, nor was there evidence of reliance by the appellant on the lessor's conduct regarding the existence of a separate electricity meter. Consequently, there was no misleading or deceptive conduct or entitlement to relief under s 18 of the ACL.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The Appeal Panel orders that the appeal be dismissed.