PENDER v ROBWENPHI PTY LIMITED & ANOR [2008] NSWSC 1144

PENDER v ROBWENPHI PTY LIMITED & ANOR [2008] NSWSC 1144

The Tribunal exercised its discretion under s.94(1A) of the Home Building Act 1989 lawfully, considered all relevant facts, correctly found the plaintiff benefited from the work done, properly reduced the claim for travel time, and the award on quantum meruit was justified; Tribunal's omission to set out detailed reasons for costs did not deprive decision of validity as exceptional circumstances were present. No error of law was established under the scope of appeal permitted by s.67 of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001.

Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: David Burnett Pender; First Defendant/respondent: Robwenphi Pty Limited (formerly R W Palmer Electrical Services Pty Limited); Second Defendant: Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Tribunal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
CTTT Appeal, Exercise of Discretion Under Home Building Act 1989 S.94(1 A), Quantum Meruit, Award of Costs Under CTTT Regulations
Administrative Law CTTT Appeal Exercise of Discretion Under Home Building Act 1989 S.94(1 A) Quantum Meruit Award of Costs Under CTTT Regulations

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Burnett Pender

Plaintiff/appellant

Robwenphi Pty Limited (formerly R W Palmer Electrical Services Pty Limited)

First Defendant/respondent

Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal properly exercised discretion under s.94(1A) of the Home Building Act 1989 to award money on quantum meruit basis
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal took into account relevant/irrelevant matters in determining 'just and equitable'
  3. 3 Whether there was evidence to support a quantum meruit claim

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal exercised its discretion under s.94(1A) of the Home Building Act 1989 lawfully, considered all relevant facts, correctly found the plaintiff benefited from the work done, properly reduced the claim for travel time, and the award on quantum meruit was justified; Tribunal's omission to set out detailed reasons for costs did not deprive decision of validity as exceptional circumstances were present. No error of law was established under the scope of appeal permitted by s.67 of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Plaintiff to pay one half of the first defendant's costs as agreed or assessed (affirmed)