JIH Building Design Pty Ltd & Anor v Raffie [2021] NSWCATAP 32

JIH Building Design Pty Ltd & Anor v Raffie [2021] NSWCATAP 32

The Tribunal at first instance misconstrued the terms of the agreement by failing to consider whether the parties agreed to additional services (strata plan) for an extra fee as permitted by the contract. The evidence established a separate agreement for the $550 strata plan. The order in relation to repayment for the strata plan and the sewer feasibility payment was set aside. However, the Tribunal did not err in ordering repayment of the $3700 refunded by Council, as the Appellant did not demonstrate entitlement to retain part of that sum.

Parties
First Appellant: JIH Building Design Pty Ltd; Second Appellant: Jason Harb; Respondent: Abiedah Raffie
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal upheld in part; original order set aside; new orders made; cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Civil and Administrative Tribunal—nsw, Appeal—question of Law, Contract Construction, Consumer Claims
Administrative Law Contract Law Civil and Administrative Tribunal—nsw Appeal—question of Law Contract Construction Consumer Claims

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JIH Building Design Pty Ltd

First Appellant

Jason Harb

Second Appellant

Abiedah Raffie

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal erred in construing the contract regarding the strata plan fee
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal erred in ordering restitution for the sewer feasibility payment
  3. 3 Whether the Tribunal erred in ordering the return of the Council application fee

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal at first instance misconstrued the terms of the agreement by failing to consider whether the parties agreed to additional services (strata plan) for an extra fee as permitted by the contract. The evidence established a separate agreement for the $550 strata plan. The order in relation to repayment for the strata plan and the sewer feasibility payment was set aside. However, the Tribunal did not err in ordering repayment of the $3700 refunded by Council, as the Appellant did not demonstrate entitlement to retain part of that sum.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld in part; original order set aside; new orders made; cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal upheld
  • The order made on 1st October 2020 is set aside