Jason Field & Kim Field v Craig John Dettman [2011] NSWDC 125

Jason Field & Kim Field v Craig John Dettman [2011] NSWDC 125

The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal Member's findings that the parties had an owner-builder style arrangement, rather than a fixed-price contract for the respondent to construct the house, were open on the unchallenged and objective evidence. The appellants failed to establish a mistake of fact or law requiring restitution, and the Home Building Act 1989 did not make the contract void or require repayment of moneys already applied for the appellants' benefit. The Tribunal Member made no error of law in finding that the respondent retained only a fair and reasonable amount on a quantum meruit basis and in using the expert evidence as a guide rather than adopting the appellants'...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Orders Concerning Residential Building Works / Appeal Decision
Outcome
The appeal is dismissed.
Legal Topics
['home Building Act 1989' 'residential Building Work' 'home Warranty Insurance' 'unenforceable Building Contracts' 'mistake of Fact and Mistake of Law' 'quantum Meruit' 'owner Builder Arrangements' 'appeal on a Question of Law']
['building and Construction' 'contract Law' 'restitution' 'consumer and Tenancy Tribunal Appeals'] ['home Building Act 1989' 'residential Building Work' 'home Warranty Insurance' 'unenforceable Building Contracts' 'mistake of Fact and Mistake of Law' 'quantum Meruit' 'owner Builder Arrangements' 'appeal on a Question of Law']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Orders Concerning Residential Building Works / Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Tribunal Member's findings about the contractual relationship between the parties were contrary to or unsupported by the evidence." "Whether findings concerning the respondent's licence status, absence of written contract and absence of home warranty insurance required a finding that money was paid under a mistake of fact or law." 'Whether the appellants were entitled to restitution or reimbursement of moneys paid to the respondent.' 'Whether the Tribunal Member made an error of law in dealing with the quantum meruit aspects of the claim and the expert evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal Member's findings that the parties had an owner-builder style arrangement, rather than a fixed-price contract for the respondent to construct the house, were open on the unchallenged and objective evidence. The appellants failed to establish a mistake of fact or law requiring restitution, and the Home Building Act 1989 did not make the contract void or require repayment of moneys already applied for the appellants' benefit. The Tribunal Member made no error of law in finding that the respondent retained only a fair and reasonable amount on a quantum meruit basis and in using the expert evidence as a guide rather than adopting the appellants'...

Court Disposition

The appeal is dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' "The appellants are to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal. This order is suspended for seven days to allow the parties within that period to relist the matter for argument on the issue of costs." 'The exhibits are returned.' 'My reasons are published.']