Betta Build Group Pty Ltd v El Baba [2019] NSWDC 331

Betta Build Group Pty Ltd v El Baba [2019] NSWDC 331

The builder failed to prove that unpaid work had a fair and reasonable value supporting quantum meruit and failed to prove actual delay costs or an entitlement to delay damages. The home owner substantially proved breaches of statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW); the Court generally preferred Mr Shilson-Josling's expert evidence on defects and rejected the builder's broad distinction between incomplete and defective works. Bellgrove v Elridge governed the measure of damages, and sale of the dwellings did not bar the accrued rectification claim. Because quantification of the rectification costs required technical assessment, that issue was referred to a referee,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Building and Construction Dispute Involving Plaintiff's Claim and Defendant's Cross Claim / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Builder's claims for quantum meruit and delay damages dismissed; home owner's cross-claim substantially upheld; rectification cost quantification referred to a referee; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['residential Building Works' 'statutory Warranties Under Home Building Act 1989 (nsw)' 'defective or Incomplete Works' 'cost of Rectification' 'quantum Meruit' 'delay Damages' 'referral to Referee']
['building and Construction' 'contract' 'damages' 'practice and Procedure'] ['residential Building Works' 'statutory Warranties Under Home Building Act 1989 (nsw)' 'defective or Incomplete Works' 'cost of Rectification' 'quantum Meruit' 'delay Damages' 'referral to Referee']

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 Building and Construction Dispute Involving Plaintiff's Claim and Defendant's Cross Claim / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the builder was entitled to quantum meruit for unpaid work performed before termination.' 'Whether the builder was entitled to delay damages.' 'Whether the home owner established breaches of statutory warranties under s 18B(1) of the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW).' 'Whether alleged works were defective or merely incomplete when the builder was excluded from the site.' 'Whether the proposed or completed rectification works were reasonable and necessary under Bellgrove v Elridge.' 'Whether quantification of rectification costs should be referred to a referee.' 'Whether the home owner was overpaid by the builder.']

Ratio Decidendi

The builder failed to prove that unpaid work had a fair and reasonable value supporting quantum meruit and failed to prove actual delay costs or an entitlement to delay damages. The home owner substantially proved breaches of statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW); the Court generally preferred Mr Shilson-Josling's expert evidence on defects and rejected the builder's broad distinction between incomplete and defective works. Bellgrove v Elridge governed the measure of damages, and sale of the dwellings did not bar the accrued rectification claim. Because quantification of the rectification costs required technical assessment, that issue was referred to a referee,...

Court Disposition

Builder's claims for quantum meruit and delay damages dismissed; home owner's cross-claim substantially upheld; rectification cost quantification referred to a referee; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The defendant/cross-claimant is directed to bring in short minutes to give effect to the reasons within 14 days.' 'Pursuant to r 20.14 of the UCPR, the general question of the cost of the rectification works for the defects found is referred to a referee.' 'The parties are to confer as to the appropriate referee...