MPM Constructions Pty Limited v Michael Triguboff & Anor [2004] NSWSC 686

MPM Constructions Pty Limited v Michael Triguboff & Anor [2004] NSWSC 686

The owners did not demonstrate that the referee's report contained an error of principle, patent misapprehension of the evidence, perversity or manifest unreasonableness. The evidence relied on by the owners did not precisely identify the defective works, show how they were rectified, or prove reasonable rectification costs, and the referee was entitled to accept Mr Eccles' assessment of $6,212 for defective works. The owners' motion to vary the referee's report therefore failed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Part 72 Reference Concerning a Building Contract Dispute / Notices of Motion Seeking Adoption or Variation of the Referee's Report Dated 22 June 2004
Outcome
Defendants' motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
['part 72 Referee Report' "adoption, Variation or Rejection of Referee's Report" 'defective Building Works' 'expert Evidence' 'rules of Evidence in References']
['civil Procedure' 'construction Law' 'evidence'] ['part 72 Referee Report' "adoption, Variation or Rejection of Referee's Report" 'defective Building Works' 'expert Evidence' 'rules of Evidence in References']

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

Part 72 Reference Concerning a Building Contract Dispute / Notices of Motion Seeking Adoption or Variation of the Referee's Report Dated 22 June 2004

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether paragraph 164 of the referee's report should be rejected or varied in relation to the cost of rectifying defective works." "Whether the referee's findings revealed an error of principle, patent misapprehension of the evidence, perversity or manifest unreasonableness in fact-finding." 'Whether the evidence relied on by the owners proved with precision the defective works and reasonable rectification costs.' 'Whether witnesses relied on by the owners were qualified to give expert opinion evidence under section 79 of the Evidence Act 1995 in a reference conducted according to the rules of evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The owners did not demonstrate that the referee's report contained an error of principle, patent misapprehension of the evidence, perversity or manifest unreasonableness. The evidence relied on by the owners did not precisely identify the defective works, show how they were rectified, or prove reasonable rectification costs, and the referee was entitled to accept Mr Eccles' assessment of $6,212 for defective works. The owners' motion to vary the referee's report therefore failed.

Court Disposition

Defendants' motion dismissed.

Orders

  • ["The owners' notice of motion fails."]