Mathieson v Green RV Pty Ltd - [2023] QCAT 193

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Mathieson v Green RV Pty Ltd [2023] QCAT 193

PARTIES: EWEN MATHIESON

(applicant)

V

GREEN RV PTY LTD

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

MVL213-22

MATTER TYPE:

Motor vehicle matter

DELIVERED ON:

29 May 2023

HEARING DATE:

25 May 2023

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Cranwell

ORDERS:
1. Ewen Mathieson is required to return the caravan the subject of these proceedings to Green RV Pty Ltd within 14 days of the date of these orders.

2. Green RV Pty Ltd is required to pay to Ewen Mathieson the amount of $67,000 within 28 days of the date of these orders.

CATCHWORDS:
TRADE AND COMMERCE – COMPETITION, FAIR TRADING AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGISLATION – CONSUMER PROTECTION – GUARANTEES, CONDITIONS AND WARRANTIES IN CONSUMER TRANSACTIONS – GUARANTEES, CONDITIONS AND WARRANTIES – whether caravan of acceptable quality – whether failure to comply with consumer guarantee a major failure – whether goods rejected during the rejection period – whether consumer entitled to refund

Australian Consumer Law, s 3, s 54, s 260, s 262, s 263

Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), Schedule 2
Fair Trading Act 1989 (Qld), s 50A

Motor Dealers and Chattel Auctioneers Act 2014 (Qld),
s 12

Campbell v Caravan & RV Central Pty Ltd t/as Avan New South Wales & FCA Australia Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCATCD 90

Haisman v Drive (Aust) Pty Ltd [2020] QCAT 44

Medtel Pty Ltd v Courtney (2003) 130 FCR 182

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:

Applicant:

Self-represented

Respondent:

Self-represented

REASONS FOR DECISION

Preliminary matters

On 11 October 2022, Mr Mathieson (the applicant) filed an application – motor vehicle dispute with the Tribunal. The respondent is Green RV Pty Ltd (the respondent).
The applicant entered into a contract with the respondent on 14 July 2021 to purchase a new 20’6 Discoverer RDC206 caravan (the caravan). The purchase price was $67,000.
‘Motor vehicle’ is defined in s 12(1) of the Motor Dealers and Chattel Auctioneers Act 2014 (Qld) to mean:
(a) a vehicle that moves on wheels and is propelled by a motor that forms part of the vehicle, whether or not the vehicle is capable of being operated or used in a normal way; or
(b) a caravan.
The applicant’s caravan falls within this definition.
The applicant seeks relief under the Australian Consumer Law, which is schedule 2 to the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth). The relief sought by the applicant is a refund.
Section 50A of the Fair Trading Act 1989 (Qld) vests the Tribunal with jurisdiction in relation to motor vehicles in respect of certain actions under the Australian Consumer Law.

Australian Consumer Law provisions

Section 54(1) of the Australian Consumer Law provides that, where a person supplies goods in trade or commerce, the goods are guaranteed to be of ‘acceptable quality’.
The time at which goods are to be of acceptable quality is the time at which the goods are supplied to the consumer: Medtel Pty Ltd v Courtney (2003) 130 FCR 182 at [64] and [70]. However, information…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Mathieson v Green RV Pty Ltd

Details

AGLC: Mathieson v Green RV Pty Ltd [2023] QCAT 193
Case: [2023] QCAT 193
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Ewen Mathieson applied to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) for a refund of the purchase price of a caravan he had bought from Green RV Pty Ltd (Green RV). The caravan had multiple structural defects causing water leakage, and Mr Mathieson had rejected the caravan and demanded a refund. Green RV refused to provide a refund and maintained that the caravan was covered by the manufacturer's warranty. Mr Mathieson collected the caravan and brought proceedings seeking a refund. Green RV denied liability. The Tribunal found that the caravan was not of acceptable quality at the time of supply, and Mr Mathieson was entitled to reject the caravan and obtain a refund of the purchase price. The Tribunal ordered Green RV to pay Mr Mathieson the purchase price of $67,000 within 28 days, and Mr Mathieson to return the caravan to Green RV within 14 days.

The legal issues before the Tribunal were whether the caravan was of acceptable quality and whether Mr Mathieson's rejection of the caravan occurred within the rejection period. The Tribunal found that the caravan was not of acceptable quality because it had multiple structural defects causing water leakage. The Tribunal found that Mr Mathieson rejected the caravan within the rejection period, which was the period from the time of supply within which it would be reasonable for the failure to become apparent. The Tribunal rejected Green RV's argument that the caravan was covered by the manufacturer's warranty, as a reasonable time for undertaking repairs had long since passed. The Tribunal ordered Green RV to pay Mr Mathieson the purchase price of $67,000 and Mr Mathieson to return the caravan within 14 days.

Orders