Mills v Walsh

[2022] NSWCA 255

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Consumer Law
2. › Misleading or deceptive conduct
3. › Damages
4. › No transaction case
5. › Onus of proving loss
6. › Requirement to prove value received less than price paid
7. › Where no satisfactory evidence of value of benefit received
8. › Australian Consumer Law, s 236
1. Consumer Law
2. › Misleading or deceptive conduct
3. › Representation by silence
4. › Whether implicit representation that construction company was licensed to undertake works
5. › Home Building Act 1989 (NSW), ss 3, 4, 5
1. Consumer Law
2. › Misleading or deceptive conduct
3. › Causation
4. › Whether sufficient causal connection where third party relies on contravening conduct resulting in loss to plaintiff
5. › Australian Consumer Law, s 236
1. Consumer Law
2. › Misleading or deceptive conduct
3. › Damages
4. › Source of value in construction contract
5. › Whether benefit to proprietor is value of works or end product
6. › Whether partially completed works rendered valueless by subsequent demolition

Quick Take

In construction-related misleading and deceptive conduct claims, evidence of the value of work and materials received must be adduced to prove loss in a 'no transaction' case; the subsequent demolition or abandonment of partially completed works does not relieve the plaintiff of this burden.