YTO Construction Pty Ltd v Bhatt [2022] NSWDC 348

YTO Construction Pty Ltd v Bhatt [2022] NSWDC 348

Mr Bhatt made the Three Representations and was involved in Innovative making them in trade or commerce. The Category 1 claims for 28 and 30 August 2017 and Category 4 claims for 4 and 7 October 2017 were misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive because the supporting material showed, or was altered to obscure, that the claimed loads were not substantiated as GSW loads. The Adjudicator relied on the misleading material in allowing the GSW cartage claim. That reliance caused YTO to be under a statutory obligation to pay an adjudicated amount including $254,100 for the misleading Category 1 and Category 4 claims, and Innovative's liquidation prevented recovery elsewhere. YTO...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceeding for Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Causing Loss in Relation to a Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (nsw) Adjudication / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $306,763.10, with costs.
Legal Topics
['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'adjudication Application' 'representations in Trade or Commerce' 'involvement in Contravention' 'reliance and Causation' 'damages and Interest']
['consumer Law' 'building and Construction' 'security of Payment'] ['misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'adjudication Application' 'representations in Trade or Commerce' 'involvement in Contravention' 'reliance and Causation' 'damages and Interest']

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

Civil Proceeding for Misleading or Deceptive Conduct Causing Loss in Relation to a Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (nsw) Adjudication / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the representations made in the adjudication material were misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive.' 'Whether representations made to an adjudicator were also made to YTO.' 'Whether the representations were made in trade or commerce.' 'Whether Mr Bhatt made the representations or was involved in Innovative making them.' 'Whether YTO suffered loss or damage because of the representations.']

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Bhatt made the Three Representations and was involved in Innovative making them in trade or commerce. The Category 1 claims for 28 and 30 August 2017 and Category 4 claims for 4 and 7 October 2017 were misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive because the supporting material showed, or was altered to obscure, that the claimed loads were not substantiated as GSW loads. The Adjudicator relied on the misleading material in allowing the GSW cartage claim. That reliance caused YTO to be under a statutory obligation to pay an adjudicated amount including $254,100 for the misleading Category 1 and Category 4 claims, and Innovative's liquidation prevented recovery elsewhere. YTO...

Court Disposition

Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $306,763.10, with costs.

Orders

  • ['Judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $306,763.10.' "Order the defendant to pay the plaintiff's costs."]