(1) Where, in any proceedings under this Part of this Act, or on the application of any person, the Court finds that a person, whether or not that person is a party to the proceedings, has suffered, or is likely to suffer, loss or damage by conduct of any other person that constitutes or would constitute—
the Court may (whether or not it grants an injunction or makes any other order under this Part of this Act) make all or any of the orders referred to in subsection (2) of this section.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section, the Court may make the following orders—
(a) An order declaring the whole or any part of a contract made between the person who suffered, or is likely to suffer, the loss or damage and the person who engaged in the conduct referred to in subsection (1) of this section or of a collateral arrangement relating to such a contract, to be void and, if the Court thinks fit, to have been void ab initio or at all times on and after such date, before the date on which the order is made, as is specified in the order:
(b) An order varying such a contract or arrangement in such manner as is specified in the order and, if the Court thinks fit, declaring the contract or arrangement to have had effect as so varied on and after such date, before the date on which the order is made, as is so specified:
(e) An order directing the person who engaged in the conduct, referred to in subsection (1) of this section at that person's own expense, to repair, or provide parts for, goods that had been supplied by the person who engaged in the conduct to the person who suffered, or is likely to suffer, the loss or damage:
(f) An order directing the person who engaged in the conduct, referred to in subsection (1) of this section at that person's own expense, to supply specified services to the person who suffered, or is likely to suffer, the loss or damage.
(3) In the exercise of its jurisdiction under this section a District Court shall not—
(e) Make an order under subsection (2)(e) of this section directing a person to repair goods or provide parts for goods where the value of the work required to repair the goods, or the value of the parts, as the case may be, exceeds $200,000:
(4) Subject to subsection (4A) of this section, in the exercise of its jurisdiction under this section a Disputes Tribunal shall not—
(c) Make an order under subsection (2)(e) of this section directing a person to repair goods or provide parts for goods where the value of the work required to repair the goods, or the value of the parts, as the case may be, exceeds $7,500:
(4A) Where, in respect of any proceedings properly before a Disputes Tribunal, the jurisdiction of the Tribunal has been extended under an agreement made pursuant to section 13 of the Disputes Tribunals Act 1988, subsection (4) of this section shall be read as if every reference in that subsection to $7,500 were a reference to $12,000.
(5) An application under subsection (1) may be made at any time within 3 years after the date on which the loss or damage, or the likelihood of loss or damage, was discovered or ought reasonably to have been discovered.
(6) An order made under subsection (2)(a) or (b) of this section shall not prevent proceedings being instituted or commenced under this Part of this Act.
(8) For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section, a reference to Court includes a reference to a District Court and a Disputes Tribunal.
Compare: Trade Practices Act 1974 (Aust), s 87(1), (1A), (2)
Subsection (3)(a) to (f) was amended, as from 13 November 1989, by section 10(1) Districts Courts Amendment Act 1989 (1989 No 107) by substituting the figure “$50,000”
for the figure “$12,000”
. This amount was further amended by section 19 District Courts Amendment Act 1991 (1991 No 61) by increasing the figure to “$200,000”
.
Subsection (4) was substituted, and subsection (4A) was inserted, as from 1 March 1989, by section 82(2) Disputes Tribunals Act 1988 (1988 No 110).
Subsection (4) was amended, as from 5 March 1999, by section 2(1) Fair Trading Amendment Act 1999 (1999 No 5) by substituting the expression “$7,500”
for the expression “$3,000”
.
Subsection (4A) was amended, as from 5 March 1999, by section 2(2) Fair Trading Amendment Act 1999 (1999 No 5) by substituting the expression “$7,500”
for the expression “$3,000”
. It was further amended by section 2(2)(b) of that Act by substituting the expression “$12,000”
for the expression “$5,000”
.
Subsection (5) was substituted, as from 3 May 2001, by section 3 Fair Trading Amendment Act 2001 (2001 No 20). See section 4 of that Act, which states that nothing in this Act: (a) enables any proceedings to be brought which were barred before the commencement of this Act; or (b) affects any proceedings commenced before the commencement of this Act.
Subsection (8) was amended, as from 1 March 1989, by section 82(2) Disputes Tribunals Act 1988 (1988 No 110) by substituting the words “Disputes Tribunal”
for the words “Small Claims Tribunal”
.
Subsection (9) was amended, as from 1 April 2000, by section 9(1) Accident Insurance Amendment Act 2000 (2000 No 6) by substituting the words “section 394 of the Accident Insurance Act 1998”
for the words “section 27 of the Accident Compensation Act 1982”
.
Subsection (9) was amended, as from 1 April 2002, by section 337(1) Injury Prevention, Rehabilatation, and Compensation Act 2001 (2001 No 49), by substituting the words “section 317 of the Injury Prevention, Rehabilatation, and Compensation Act 2001”
for the words “section 394 of the Accident Insurance Act 1998”
. See Part 10 of that Act for provisions relating to transition from competitive provision of workplace accident insurance. See Part 11 of that Act for transitional provisions relating to entitlements provided by Corporation.