Indorato v Ottaviano t/as Transbuild Construction [2019] NSWCATAP 115

Indorato v Ottaviano t/as Transbuild Construction [2019] NSWCATAP 115

No question of law arose and the homeowner did not demonstrate that she may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice under cl 12 of Sch 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013. The evidence did not so strongly support the alleged additional payments or the continued inclusion of fencing in the scope of works that the Tribunal's findings could be characterised as unreasonable, clearly unjust, or against the weight of evidence. Leave to appeal was therefore refused and the appeal dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal in a Home Building Dispute / Appeal Panel Consideration of Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; costs submissions directions made.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'appeal Against Findings of Fact' 'against the Weight of Evidence' 'scope of Works' 'alleged Contract Payments' 'costs in Internal Appeals']
['home Building' 'civil and Administrative Tribunal Procedure' 'costs'] ['leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'appeal Against Findings of Fact' 'against the Weight of Evidence' 'scope of Works' 'alleged Contract Payments' 'costs in Internal Appeals']

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

Internal Appeal in a Home Building Dispute / Appeal Panel Consideration of Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the homeowner should be granted leave to appeal under cl 12 of Sch 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred by not taking into account alleged additional payments totalling $7,000.00.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred by finding that front and side fencing had been taken out of the scope of works.' 'Whether any costs order should be made in favour of the builder.']

Ratio Decidendi

No question of law arose and the homeowner did not demonstrate that she may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice under cl 12 of Sch 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013. The evidence did not so strongly support the alleged additional payments or the continued inclusion of fencing in the scope of works that the Tribunal's findings could be characterised as unreasonable, clearly unjust, or against the weight of evidence. Leave to appeal was therefore refused and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; costs submissions directions made.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal refused;' 'Appeal dismissed;' 'If the builder seeks an order that its costs of the appeal be paid by the homeowner, the builder must file and serve submissions in support of such application within 14 days of the date of publication of this decision;' "The homeowner has 14 days thereafter to file...