A1 Granny Flats Pty Ltd v Liu [2022] NSWCATAP 66

A1 Granny Flats Pty Ltd v Liu [2022] NSWCATAP 66

The Appeal Panel found no appealable error or basis for leave in the Builder's challenge to the substantive award because the grounds either attempted to rerun the case, raised matters not put before the Tribunal, were unsupported by evidence, or did not disclose an issue of principle, public importance, clear injustice, plain central error, clearly mistaken factual error, or unfair fact-finding. However, the Tribunal gave no reasons for dismissing the Builder's cross application for $8,430, and that failure to give reasons was an error of law requiring that part of the appeal to be allowed and remitted for determination by another member.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal From a Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Concerning a Residential Building/granny Flat Dispute / Appeal Panel Decision on Appeal and Leave to Appeal From the Decision Dated 19 October 2021 in Matter HB 21/25364
Outcome
Appeal allowed in relation to the dismissal of the Builder's cross application and remitted; leave to appeal refused and appeal otherwise dismissed in relation to the balance of the appeal.
Legal Topics
['internal Appeals' 'leave to Appeal' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'residential Building Contract' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'remittal']
['civil Procedure' 'administrative Law' 'consumer Law' 'home Building'] ['internal Appeals' 'leave to Appeal' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct' 'residential Building Contract' 'adequacy of Reasons' 'remittal']

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 From a Consumer and Commercial Division Decision Concerning a Residential Building/granny Flat Dispute / Appeal Panel Decision on Appeal and Leave to Appeal From the Decision Dated 19 October 2021 in Matter HB 21/25364

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appellant identified an error of law permitting an appeal as of right.' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted on grounds that the Tribunal decision was not fair and equitable or was against the weight of the evidence.' 'Whether the Tribunal erred in accepting that representations in the Tender and by the sales representative induced the respondent to enter the contract.' "Whether the Tribunal failed to give adequate reasons for dismissing the appellant's cross application."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel found no appealable error or basis for leave in the Builder's challenge to the substantive award because the grounds either attempted to rerun the case, raised matters not put before the Tribunal, were unsupported by evidence, or did not disclose an issue of principle, public importance, clear injustice, plain central error, clearly mistaken factual error, or unfair fact-finding. However, the Tribunal gave no reasons for dismissing the Builder's cross application for $8,430, and that failure to give reasons was an error of law requiring that part of the appeal to be allowed and remitted for determination by another member.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in relation to the dismissal of the Builder's cross application and remitted; leave to appeal refused and appeal otherwise dismissed in relation to the balance of the appeal.

Orders

  • ['The appeal in relation to the cross application filed by the appellant and dismissed in the reasons for decision in matter HB 21/25364 is allowed and the matter remitted to the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Tribunal for determination by another member.' 'In relation to the balance of the appeal, leave to...