Vasan v Georges Construction & Building Services Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATCD 84

Vasan v Georges Construction & Building Services Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATCD 84

The respondent was not licensed when the contract was made or when the work was performed, the work was incomplete and some completed work was not carried out in a proper and workmanlike manner in breach of the Home Building Act warranties. A work order was inappropriate because the respondent had disregarded its statutory obligations, still lacked an appropriate licence, did not offer to return, and the relationship had broken down. The applicant was entitled to a money order for the additional cost to complete and rectify the work over the amended contract price, plus reasonable costs, but not fuel or lost wages.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Building Claim Concerning Residential Building Work / Principal Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed in part; money order made for the applicant.
Legal Topics
['unlicensed Builder' 'incomplete Building Work' 'breach of Statutory Warranties' 'home Building Act 1989' 'rectification and Completion Costs' 'work Order Versus Money Order' 'costs']
['building and Construction' 'residential Building Work' 'contract'] ['unlicensed Builder' 'incomplete Building Work' 'breach of Statutory Warranties' 'home Building Act 1989' 'rectification and Completion Costs' 'work Order Versus Money Order' 'costs']

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 Concerning Residential Building Work / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the claim was a building claim within the Tribunal's jurisdiction and brought within time under the Home Building Act 1989." 'Whether the respondent was licensed and whether the work was incomplete or in breach of statutory warranties.' 'Whether the appropriate remedy was a work order or a money order.' 'What compensation and costs should be awarded to the applicant.']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent was not licensed when the contract was made or when the work was performed, the work was incomplete and some completed work was not carried out in a proper and workmanlike manner in breach of the Home Building Act warranties. A work order was inappropriate because the respondent had disregarded its statutory obligations, still lacked an appropriate licence, did not offer to return, and the relationship had broken down. The applicant was entitled to a money order for the additional cost to complete and rectify the work over the amended contract price, plus reasonable costs, but not fuel or lost wages.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; money order made for the applicant.

Orders

  • ['Georges Construction & Building Services Pty Ltd is to pay to Anoch Vasan the sum of $66,171.95 immediately.']