There are concerns a disabled pensioner, who lost her case against Fitness First over a membership cancellation will be slapped with tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees.
The 54-year-old visited the gym for two weeks, but due to chronic medical conditions, couldn't continue - and was hoping to simply walk away.
But a court's found Suh Yoke Chong broke the conditions in her contract, and has been forced to pay.
Shadow Fair Trading Minister Catherine Cusack says the process isn't unfair.
“When a matter does go to the Supreme Court because of a blunder by a member of the tribunal, then the Supreme Court should be allowed to make cost orders against the tribunal, so that the poor innocent consumer isn’t stuck with all of these costs.”
Fitness First last night said it had pursued the case only because the earlier tribunal ruling had cast doubt over all of its gym memberships.
"It was not about the $200," Fitness First national operations manager Michele Harding said, adding there was "never any intention to pursue Ms Chong personally".
"The decision of the... tribunal challenged the validity of all signed contracts between consumers and suppliers," Ms Harding said in a statement.
"It meant that a signed contract can be declared invalid because a party says that they don't understand it, despite having signed it.
"It is unfortunate that Ms Chong was included as a party in the proceedings, but there was no way that she could not be."
