Veltri v Jacay Pty Ltd

Maria Caterina Veltri brought an action against Jacay Pty Ltd trading as NSW Automotive Wholesale in the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal of New South Wales, seeking a refund of a holding deposit paid for a motor vehicle which was not delivered to her. The central issue before the Tribunal was whether the oral agreement made between the parties regarding the holding deposit could be enforced and if so, under what terms. The dispute arose because the terms upon which the holding deposit was paid were unclear, and the parties could not agree on these terms based on the surrounding circumstances. The Tribunal was tasked with determining if the oral agreement could be enforced and, if so, under what terms, in the absence of a written contract.

The Tribunal held that the parties had an oral agreement regarding the purchase of the motor vehicle and the payment of the holding deposit. However, it was unable to ascertain the terms on which the deposit was held due to the lack of certainty arising from the surrounding circumstances. The Tribunal found that, in the absence of a written contract, it could not enforce the oral agreement in these circumstances. Therefore, the Tribunal ordered that Jacay Pty Ltd was to refund the holding deposit to Ms Veltri, amounting to $500.00, by a specified date.