Collings Homes v Head & Ors [2002] NSWSC 1219

Collings Homes v Head & Ors [2002] NSWSC 1219

The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because the plaintiff's services were preliminary services, not work involved in the construction of a dwelling or in coordinating or supervising such construction work, and there was no residential building work supplied by the person who contracted to do that work; therefore the defendants' Tribunal application was not a "building claim" under the Home Building Act 1989.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Supreme Court Proceedings Concerning Tribunal Jurisdiction Over a Building Claim / Reasons for Decision After Orders Setting Aside the Tribunal's Decisions and Orders
Outcome
Plaintiff succeeded on the jurisdictional issue; the Tribunal's decisions and orders were set aside.
Legal Topics
['jurisdiction of Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal' 'building Claim' 'residential Building Work' 'construction of a Dwelling']
['administrative Law' 'home Building Law'] ['jurisdiction of Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal' 'building Claim' 'residential Building Work' 'construction of a Dwelling']

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

Supreme Court Proceedings Concerning Tribunal Jurisdiction Over a Building Claim / Reasons for Decision After Orders Setting Aside the Tribunal's Decisions and Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendants\' Tribunal application was a "building claim" under the Home Building Act 1989.' 'Whether the plaintiff\'s services fell within the definition of "residential building work" as work involved in, or in coordinating or supervising work involved in, the construction of a dwelling.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal lacked jurisdiction because the plaintiff's services were preliminary services, not work involved in the construction of a dwelling or in coordinating or supervising such construction work, and there was no residential building work supplied by the person who contracted to do that work; therefore the defendants' Tribunal application was not a "building claim" under the Home Building Act 1989.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff succeeded on the jurisdictional issue; the Tribunal's decisions and orders were set aside.

Orders

  • ['The determination as to jurisdiction was disturbed.' 'The decisions and orders of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal made on 22 July 2002 were set aside.']