Access Housing Pty Ltd v Rayfield [2018] NSWSC 599

Access Housing Pty Ltd v Rayfield [2018] NSWSC 599

No question of law was raised by the Plaintiff’s grounds; the appeal from the Appeal Panel was confined by statute to questions of law; both the Tribunal and Appeal Panel had evidence supporting their factual conclusions regarding demolition as remedy and the Plaintiff's contractual duty to enable occupation certification; procedural fairness was not breached as the evidentiary process was properly followed.

Parties
Plaintiff: Access Housing Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Christopher Rayfield; Second Defendant: Becky Rayfield
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Appeal Panel of NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Outcome
Leave to appeal denied; Summons dismissed; Plaintiff to pay Defendants' costs.
Legal Topics
Appeal From Tribunal Decisions, Statutory Warranties, Procedural Fairness, Question of Law Vs Fact, Residential Building Work
Civil Procedure Building and Construction Law Appeal From Tribunal Decisions Statutory Warranties Procedural Fairness Question of Law Vs Fact Residential Building Work

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 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Access Housing Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Christopher Rayfield

First Defendant

Becky Rayfield

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Appeal Panel of NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appeal Panel erred in law in upholding the Tribunal’s finding that demolition was the only remedy
  2. 2 Whether the Plaintiff was liable for lack of Occupation Certificate
  3. 3 Whether procedural fairness was afforded regarding cross-examination of a witness

Ratio Decidendi

No question of law was raised by the Plaintiff’s grounds; the appeal from the Appeal Panel was confined by statute to questions of law; both the Tribunal and Appeal Panel had evidence supporting their factual conclusions regarding demolition as remedy and the Plaintiff's contractual duty to enable occupation certification; procedural fairness was not breached as the evidentiary process was properly followed.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal denied; Summons dismissed; Plaintiff to pay Defendants' costs.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal denied
  • Summons dismissed