General division case studies

Case study 1: Reception

A couple was married in Sydney and held their wedding reception at a 5-star function centre.  On the evening of their wedding, a severe thunderstorm struck causing extensive blackouts and storm damage across several areas of Sydney.  As a result of the blackout the function centre lost all power.  It was two hours before the function centre was able to obtain a generator to provide power for the music and limited lightning.  However the mains power was not restored for the remainder of the evening.

The couple lodged an application to the CTTT seeking a full refund of the $19,000 paid for the reception.  On the hearing day both parties appeared and they were encouraged to attempt conciliation.  However they were unable to reach a settlement and the matter proceeded to hearing.

During the hearing the bride gave detailed evidence of the inconvenience that the bridal party and the guests experienced.  She said that the lack of air-conditioning was unbearable, the drinks were served warm, the lighting from candles was inadequate, and the music they had carefully selected could not be played at the chosen times.  The couple considered that the reception they received was not what they had planned and paid for.

The function centre's manager gave evidence that the thunderstorm was one of the worst experienced in Sydney.  Lightning strikes and gale force winds caused such extensive damage that it was officially declared a ‘natural disaster’.  The manager told the Tribunal Member that they provided the best possible service given the circumstances.  They extended the time for the reception, served complimentary drinks and obtained more bottled drinks from an external source at no cost to the wedding party.  However, without mains power they could not provide air-conditioning.  He also gave evidence of the extremely difficult road and driving conditions delayed the delivery of the backup generator.  The manager stated that the function centre considered it performed its agreement and met its contractual obligations to the best of their ability in very difficult circumstances.

The Tribunal Member carefully considered the evidence of the couple and the function centre.  The Member stated it was extremely unfortunate for all concerned that a severe thunderstorm struck Sydney on the evening of the wedding reception resulting in great inconvenience to the bridal party and their guests.  The Member agreed that this was not the wedding reception the couple had planned causing distress and great disappointment.

The Tribunal Member then considered the couple's claim for a full refund of the cost of the reception.  The Member considered that making such an order would result in the function centre receiving no payment at all for the meals served, the drinks provided, the use of the venue and all the efforts made by the function centre in response to the difficult circumstances of that evening.

The Member stated that although the couple was severely disappointed by the reception, they did not produce sufficient evidence to show that the function centre broke its contract or that they were legally responsible for their disappointment, and that despite the difficult conditions the function centre had provided the wedding reception.  Orders were made dismissing the couple's application for a full refund.

Case study 2: Photography

A woman who was engaged to be married had paid $2,175 for a photographer to provide wedding photographs, DVD recording and a wedding album of both the service and reception.  The wedding took place as planned and the photographs, DVD and wedding album were provided.  However the woman was very disappointed with the quality of the photographs.  She felt there was a limited range of photographs to choose from as many were out of focus, some subjects had their eyes closed.  Particular shots of the wedding party were also not taken as requested.  The woman was also disappointed with the format of the DVD as none of the speeches were recorded.  She complained to the photographer who was able to improve some of the photographs, but overall this was not sufficient to the bride.  She then lodged an application to the CTTT for a full refund of the amount paid.

At the hearing the photographer did not appear, only the woman.  The woman gave the Tribunal Member evidence of various emails between herself and the photographer as to the agreed photographic services to be provided.  She also brought the wedding album and DVD for the Tribunal Member to view.

The Tribunal Member stated that although she was disappointed with the photographic service, the role of the Tribunal is to determine whether the photographer had legally fulfilled the contract, rather than her expectations.  The Member agreed that the photographs taken exhibited a lack of skill and that the DVD format was not supplied as requested by her.  However, she did receive some photographs of reasonable quality and had received the wedding album as required under the contract.  Having received some benefit, the Member did not consider that the woman was entitled to claim the full amount, and made orders instead for a partial refund of $1,500.