Bowman v Curtis [2022] NSWCATCD 125

Bowman v Curtis [2022] NSWCATCD 125

The respondent breached the statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) by failing to carry out the works with due care and skill and in accordance with Australian Standards, as evidenced by unrectified defects and failed waterproofing. Due to the breakdown of trust, lack of confidence in the respondent's ability or willingness to rectify the defects, and to achieve a timely and cost-effective resolution, a money order (rather than a work order) is appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Building Claim / Final Determination
Outcome
Money order for rectification of defects in favour of the applicant.
Legal Topics
['statutory Warranties' 'defective Building Work' 'rectification' 'money Order Vs Work Order' 'tribunal Jurisdiction']
['building and Construction Law'] ['statutory Warranties' 'defective Building Work' 'rectification' 'money Order Vs Work Order' 'tribunal Jurisdiction']

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

Building Claim / Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the works carried out by the respondent were defective and breached statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW)' 'Whether the Tribunal should make a work order or a money order for rectification of defects']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent breached the statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) by failing to carry out the works with due care and skill and in accordance with Australian Standards, as evidenced by unrectified defects and failed waterproofing. Due to the breakdown of trust, lack of confidence in the respondent's ability or willingness to rectify the defects, and to achieve a timely and cost-effective resolution, a money order (rather than a work order) is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Money order for rectification of defects in favour of the applicant.

Orders

  • ['The respondent must pay the applicant the sum of $26,490.89 within 21 days of the date of this order.']