Belconnen Automotive Pty Ltd Trading as Gerald Slaven Volkswagen v Kennedy (Appeal)

The appeal before the Tribunal involved a dispute between Belconnen Automotive Pty Ltd, trading as Gerald Slaven Volkswagen, and Kennedy. The central issue was whether the respondent had exercised the requisite degree of care and skill in replacing a timing belt on the appellant's vehicle, leading to damages. The case was heard initially in the ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal before being appealed to the Tribunal. The appellant alleged that the replacement of the timing belt was done without the necessary care and skill, which resulted in damage to the vehicle. The Tribunal was required to evaluate the conflicting expert evidence presented by both parties regarding the standard of care and skill exercised during the replacement and to determine the causation of the damages. Additionally, the Tribunal had to assess whether the respondent was contributorily negligent and, if so, to what extent that contributed to the damages. The Tribunal also needed to evaluate the fairness of the damages awarded and whether the respondent had been unjustly enriched.

The Tribunal found no error in the initial decision that the respondent did not exercise the requisite degree of care and skill. The Tribunal reviewed the expert evidence and concluded that the primary judge did not err in preferring the evidence of the respondent's expert over that of the appellant. The Tribunal held that the issue of causation was a question of fact and that the primary judge's findings on causation were not unreasonable. The Tribunal also found no error in the decision that the respondent was not contributorily negligent. The Tribunal further held that the damages awarded were fair and that there was no unjust enrichment of the respondent. The Tribunal made minor amendments to the amount of damages awarded and the interest calculation, but otherwise dismissed the appeal.

The Tribunal confirmed the decision of the primary judge and made a minor amendment to the amount of damages awarded and the interest calculation. The appeal was dismissed, and the Tribunal ordered that the decision under appeal be amended to reflect these changes. Specifically, the Tribunal substituted the amount of damages awarded with $18,469.81 and adjusted the interest calculation on certain items. The Tribunal's decision upheld the findings of the primary judge and dismissed the appeal, with the minor amendments to the damages and interest.