Hatfield v Home Team Constructions Pty Limited [2007] NSWSC 978

Hatfield v Home Team Constructions Pty Limited [2007] NSWSC 978

The amended summons was dismissed because the question of law relied on in the Supreme Court, namely whether breach of s 16 of the Home Building Act 1989 made the contract unenforceable by general law principles, was not a question the plaintiffs had asked the Tribunal to decide. The Tribunal had dealt with the different submission that ss 4 and 10 of the Home Building Act 1989 made the contract unenforceable. As the asserted question of law was not decided by the Tribunal, it could not found the appeal under s 67.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 September 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal of NSW / Amended Summons Appealing the Whole of the Tribunal Decision
Outcome
The amended summons is dismissed; the plaintiffs are to pay the defendant's costs.
Legal Topics
['competency of Appeal From Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal' 'contractor Licensing' 'home Warranty Insurance Threshold' 'enforceability of Building Contract' 'questions of Law on Appeal']
['administrative Law' 'consumer Law' 'home Building Law'] ['competency of Appeal From Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal' 'contractor Licensing' 'home Warranty Insurance Threshold' 'enforceability of Building Contract' 'questions of Law on Appeal']

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

Appeal From Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal of NSW / Amended Summons Appealing the Whole of the Tribunal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the appeal was competent under s 67 of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 (NSW).' 'Whether the Tribunal decided the question of law concerning the legal effect of ss 16, 27 and 28 of the Home Building Act 1989 that the plaintiffs relied on in the Supreme Court.' 'Whether the licence condition on the nominated supervisor restricted supervision of residential building work over $12,000.00.' "Whether an alleged breach of s 16 of the Home Building Act 1989 would render Home Team's contract unenforceable."]

Ratio Decidendi

The amended summons was dismissed because the question of law relied on in the Supreme Court, namely whether breach of s 16 of the Home Building Act 1989 made the contract unenforceable by general law principles, was not a question the plaintiffs had asked the Tribunal to decide. The Tribunal had dealt with the different submission that ss 4 and 10 of the Home Building Act 1989 made the contract unenforceable. As the asserted question of law was not decided by the Tribunal, it could not found the appeal under s 67.

Court Disposition

The amended summons is dismissed; the plaintiffs are to pay the defendant's costs.

Orders

  • ['The amended summons is dismissed.' "The plaintiffs are to pay the defendant's costs."]