Rehman v F&F Smart Homes Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATCD 12
A work order is made for defective items, reflecting statutory preference and practical benefits. Money order is granted for cost savings from lower-rated insulation ($1,412.25), incomplete swimming pool ($21,480.96), and delay damages ($3,357.43), totaling $26,250.64. Calculation of delay and rent loss is limited to periods and evidence reasonably proved. Rectification methods accepted when reasonable and supported by expert evidence; certain alleged defects rejected for want of reliable evidence. Costs to be determined after written submissions.
- Parties
- Applicant: Abdul Mateen Rehman; Respondent: F&F Smart Homes Pty Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 16 January 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Building and Construction—defective, Incomplete Work, Delay / Final Determination—principal Judgment
- Outcome
- Work order for defects; monetary award for incomplete work and delay; costs submissions ordered.
- Legal Topics
- Defective Work, Incomplete Work, Delay Damages, Statutory Warranties, Rectification Orders, Damages, Mitigation of Loss, Work Order Vs Money Order, Costs
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Abdul Mateen Rehman
Applicant
F&F Smart Homes Pty Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Building and Construction—defective, Incomplete Work, Delay / Final Determination—principal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Should a work order or money order be made for defective building work?
- 2 Assessment of damages for incomplete work and delay?
- 3 Entitlement and calculation of damages for delayed completion and incomplete swimming pool?
Ratio Decidendi
A work order is made for defective items, reflecting statutory preference and practical benefits. Money order is granted for cost savings from lower-rated insulation ($1,412.25), incomplete swimming pool ($21,480.96), and delay damages ($3,357.43), totaling $26,250.64. Calculation of delay and rent loss is limited to periods and evidence reasonably proved. Rectification methods accepted when reasonable and supported by expert evidence; certain alleged defects rejected for want of reliable evidence. Costs to be determined after written submissions.
Court Disposition
Work order for defects; monetary award for incomplete work and delay; costs submissions ordered.
Orders
- The respondent is to carry out a work order, as set out in Schedule 1.
- The respondent is to pay the applicant $26,250.64 forthwith.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment