Brian Lauer and Carmen Lauer t/a Grand Prix Motors v Sam Rayment [2015] NSWCATAP 32

Leave to appeal is refused because the purported new evidence relied upon by the appellants is not significant nor new, as it was reasonably available prior to the original hearing and could have been obtained with reasonable diligence. Thus, no substantial miscarriage of justice occurred under the grounds specified in Clause 12 of Schedule 4 of the Act.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 05 March 2015
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Determination of Appeal
Outcome: Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: ['leave to Appeal' 'significant New Evidence' 'sale of Goods' 'statutory Warranty' 'compensation for Defective Goods']

['consumer Law' 'tribunal Procedure'] ['leave to Appeal' 'significant New Evidence' 'sale of Goods' 'statutory Warranty' 'compensation for Defective Goods']

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

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Determination of Appeal

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted under Schedule 4, Clause 12 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 due to significant new evidence or miscarriage of justice' 'Whether the Tribunal’s decision was not fair and equitable or was against the weight of evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused and appeal dismissed

Orders

['Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' 'The stay order made on 12 November 2014 is lifted.']