Malic v Hotbody Pty Ltd t/as Tattxtract

Malic v Hotbody Pty Ltd t/as Tattxtract involves a dispute between a consumer, Malic, and a business, Hotbody Pty Ltd, trading as Tattxtract. The consumer sought a refund for an alleged purchase of unsafe and unusable goods. The matter was heard and dismissed by the Australian Consumer and Competition Tribunal (the Tribunal). The Tribunal found that the consumer had not established that she had purchased the goods in question from the business. The Tribunal also found that the consumer had not established that the goods were unsafe or unusable. The consumer appealed the Tribunal's decision to the Court.

The appeal raised two primary legal issues. The first issue was whether the Tribunal's finding that the consumer did not establish that she had purchased the goods from the business was open to the Tribunal. The second issue was whether the consumer was given an adequate opportunity to be heard by the Tribunal. The consumer argued that the Tribunal had erred in its findings and that she was not given a fair opportunity to present her case.

The Court found that the Tribunal's findings were open to it based on the evidence presented. The Court also found that the consumer was given an adequate opportunity to be heard and that there was no procedural unfairness. The Court concluded that the appeal did not raise a question of law of general public importance, and therefore, leave to appeal was refused. The Tribunal's decision to dismiss the consumer's claim was upheld.