Pulitano v Murtas Holdings Pty Ltd t/as DMM Mobile Mechanic

Pulitano brought an action against Murtas Holdings, trading as DMM Mobile Mechanic, in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The dispute involved claims for damages related to alleged breaches of contract and misleading or deceptive conduct under the Australian Consumer Law. The plaintiff, Pulitano, sought compensation for losses and expenses incurred due to the defendant's failure to provide a mobile mechanic service as promised.

The legal issues that came before the court included whether the plaintiff was entitled to lead additional evidence not presented at the trial and whether the plaintiff should be granted leave to appeal the trial judge's decision. The court had to consider the grounds on which the plaintiff based the application for fresh evidence and whether there were compelling reasons for the plaintiff to be allowed to appeal the judgment.

In dismissing the application to lead fresh evidence, the court held that there were no exceptional circumstances justifying the introduction of new evidence. The court further found that the evidence, if it had been available, would not have changed the outcome of the trial. In relation to the application for leave to appeal, the court considered the grounds of appeal provided by the plaintiff and concluded that they did not demonstrate a probability of success on appeal. The court emphasised the importance of finality in litigation and the need to prevent the re-litigation of issues that had already been determined. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was also refused.