Squadrito v Theodosi [2023] NSWCATCD 173

Squadrito v Theodosi [2023] NSWCATCD 173

The respondent breached s 60 of the ACL by failing to exercise due care and skill in conducting a pre-purchase inspection and report, missing visible evidence of termite activity and structural issues, which led the applicants to purchase the property while unaware of significant defects. Damages were awarded for rectification, tree removal, and termite elimination, as these losses were directly caused by the breach and were reasonably foreseeable. Costs were awarded on the ordinary basis due to the claim exceeding $30,000 and there being no disentitling conduct by the applicants.

Parties
Applicant: Bianca Squadrito; Applicant: Julian Gennusa; Respondent: Andrew Theodosi
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Consumer Claim / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application allowed; respondent liable for damages and costs.
Legal Topics
Failure to Exercise Due Care and Skill, Assessment of Damages, Building Inspection Liability, Costs in Tribunal Proceedings
Consumer Law Contract Law Torts (negligence) Failure to Exercise Due Care and Skill Assessment of Damages Building Inspection Liability Costs in Tribunal Proceedings

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bianca Squadrito

Applicant

Julian Gennusa

Applicant

Andrew Theodosi

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Consumer Claim / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent failed to exercise due care and skill under s 60 of the Australian Consumer Law when conducting a pre-purchase inspection and report
  2. 2 Whether the applicants suffered loss as a result of any such failure and are entitled to damages
  3. 3 Whether the respondent should be liable for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent breached s 60 of the ACL by failing to exercise due care and skill in conducting a pre-purchase inspection and report, missing visible evidence of termite activity and structural issues, which led the applicants to purchase the property while unaware of significant defects. Damages were awarded for rectification, tree removal, and termite elimination, as these losses were directly caused by the breach and were reasonably foreseeable. Costs were awarded on the ordinary basis due to the claim exceeding $30,000 and there being no disentitling conduct by the applicants.

Court Disposition

Application allowed; respondent liable for damages and costs.

Orders

  • The respondent is to pay the applicants $45,271.00 immediately.
  • The respondent is to pay the costs of the applicants, on the ordinary basis, as agreed or assessed.