Sydney Horse Transport v Langdon
[2015] QCAT 462
•23 October 2015
| CITATION: | Sydney Horse Transport v Langdon [2015] QCAT 462 |
| PARTIES: | Sydney Horse Transport (Applicant) |
| v | |
| Peter Langdon (Respondent) |
| APPLICATION NUMBER: | MCDO242/15 |
| MATTER TYPE: | Other minor civil dispute matters |
| HEARING DATE: | 1 September 2015 |
| HEARD AT: | Southport |
| DECISION OF: | Adjudicator Mewing |
| DELIVERED ON: | 23 October 2015 |
| DELIVERED AT: | Southport |
| ORDERS MADE: | 1. The application is dismissed. 2. The Applicant is to arrange the release of the horses Aussie Tenant, Mary and With Danger into the custody of the Respondent by no later than 6 November 2015 without fee or charge. |
| CATCHWORDS: | MINOR CIVIL DISPUTE – contract matters – liquidated debt – whether contracting party certain – whether agency arrangement existed – whether course of dealing. Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld) s 13(2)(iv) Brambles Holdings Limited v Bathurst City Council [2001] NSWCA 61 |
APPEARANCES AND REPRESENTATIVES:
| APPLICANT: | Adam Maley |
| FIRST RESPONDENT: | Peter Langdon, represented by Tim Johnson (solicitor, Stable Legal) |
REASONS FOR DECISION
Claim
This is a claim from Sydney Horse Transport seeking payment of $15,707.10 by the Respondent, comprising $2,805.00 for transportation of three horses from Kenilworth in Queensland to Bangholme in Victoria, plus agistment expenses, which totalled approximately $12,902.10 when the application was filed. The Applicant also seeks payment $312.60 for fees associated with its application.
Background
On 12 October 2014 Sydney Horse Transport collected three race horses named Mary, Aussie Tenant and With Danger from a property at Kenilworth, Queensland for transport to an address in Bangholme, Victoria. The horses are owned by the Respondent, Peter Langdon.
On 1 March 2015 Sydney Horse Transport invoiced Mr Langdon for $9,933.00 for the transportation costs for the horses and agistment fees. Mr Langdon refused to pay, saying that he had not asked Sydney Horse Transport to collect the horses.
Sydney Horse Transport claims it collected the horses after a booking was made by phone some days prior to 12 October 2014. Mr Maley, manager of Sydney Horse Transport, said the booking was taken by Lucas Waller, an employee of Sydney Horse Transport. According to Mr Maley, the only record of the booking was a notation made by Mr Waller which included the pickup address and a mobile telephone number.
Mr Maley said Mr Waller assumed the order had been placed by Mr Langdon or a representative of Mr Langdon. Mr Langdon denies making the booking, and says he did not authorise anyone else to make the booking on his behalf.
It was determined by a police officer in Victoria (after a complaint was made by Mr Langdon about alleged theft of the horses) that the mobile telephone number written down by Mr Waller at the time of the booking has been disconnected. The officer also determined that the disconnected phone number had not belonged to Mr Langdon nor anyone who could be connected with Mr Langdon.
Mr Langdon says the first he knew that the horses had left Queensland bound for Victoria was when Sydney Horse Transport called him in October 2014 to tell him his horses were in Sydney. (Mr Maley said Sydney Horse Transport had called Mr Langdon at that point because Mr Langdon still owed money to Sydney Horse Transport for the horses’ northward journey. That amount has since been paid.) Mr Langdon said he asked Sydney Horse Transport to return the horses to Queensland. Sydney Horse Transport continued to take the horses to Victoria.
Mr Maley said he believes Mr Langdon or a representative must have made the booking because he is the only person who stood to benefit from the horses going back to Melbourne. He believed that Mr Langdon would have wanted the horses in Victoria as he lives there and owns property there.
Basis of Claim
In order to establish a legal basis for its claim before the Tribunal, Sydney Horse Transport must show that it had a contract with Mr Langdon to transport the horses from Queensland to Victoria, and that the contract also provided that agistment fees would be payable if the horses were to be kept by or in the care of Sydney Horse Transport for any reason.
A contract need not be in writing: A contract can be made without clear offer and acceptance if the parties have otherwise manifested their mutual assent.[1] A contract requires proof of offer, acceptance, consideration and an intention to create legal relations to be legally enforceable. The terms must be certain and the parties must have capacity to enter into the contract. Acceptance of an offer can only result in a binding contract where there has been knowledge of the offer and a clear intention to accept that offer.[2]
[1]Brambles Holding Limited v Bathurst City Council [2001] NSWCA 61.
[2]Taylor v Johnson (1983) 151 CLR 422.
Mr Maley conceded that Sydney Horse Transport did not have a written contract with Mr Langdon. He also said that he could not say with any degree of certainty that Mr Langdon was the person who called to book the horses.
If Sydney Horse Transport can’t prove Mr Langdon made the booking, it may be successful if it shows that a representative of Mr Langdon made it as his authorised agent. Affidavits were tendered into evidence from horse trainers who had had some dealing with the horses during their stay in Queensland but these shed no light on who may have made the booking. There is reference in these affidavits to a Mr Drew Crouch, another horse trainer with whom Mr Langdon claims to have had an agency arrangement pursuant to which Mr Crouch would train and take care of the horses in return for a percentage of any winnings. Mr Maley provided no evidence that Mr Crouch made the booking.
Contractual obligations may also arise between parties where there has been a clearly recognisable pattern or course of dealing between them that indicates an intention to be bound contractually.[3] Sydney Horse Transport had previously transported the three horses from Bangholme to Kenilworth in or around May 2014. On that occasion the booking was made by staff at a horse training facility in Bangholme known as Nine Dragons, and Mr Langdon said that this booking was made with his knowledge and authority. In my view, this one previous commercial arrangement did not constitute a course of dealing sufficient to establish that agents of Mr Langdon would routinely call Sydney Horse Transport on Mr Langdon’s behalf to make bookings.
[3]Henry Kendall & Sons v William Lillico & Sons Ltd [1969] 2 AC 31; Hollier v Rambler Motors (AMC) Ltd [1972] 2 QB 71.
Accordingly, while someone did call Sydney Horse Transport to have Mr Langdon’s three horses collected and taken to Victoria, there is no evidence to suggest that Mr Langdon—whether in his personal capacity or via an agent—was the person who did so. While Mr Maley is correct when he says that it seems likely that Mr Langdon was the person to have made the booking given he owns the horses, it is equally unlikely given Mr Langdon’s testimony that he had intended for the horses to stay in Queensland.
The onus was on Sydney Horse Transport to prove, on the balance of probabilities,[4] the other party to the contract was Mr Langdon and it failed to discharge that onus. The claim must therefore be dismissed.
[4]Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336.
Release of the Horses
The horses the subject of this dispute (With Danger, Mary and Aussie Tenant) have been the subject of a lien by Sydney Horse Transport in connection with the amount claimed in this application, and are apparently held in agistment at a property in Victoria.
As there is no legal basis for the lien, pursuant to s 13(2)(iv) of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 I order that the horses be released into the custody of the Respondent Mr Langdon forthwith and without any charge or fee, but in any case no later than Friday 6 November 2015.
Orders
The Orders of the Tribunal are:
a) The Application is dismissed;
b) The Applicant is to arrange the release of the horses Aussie Tenant, Mary and With Danger into the custody of the Respondent by no later than 6 November 2015 without fee or charge.
0
4
1