Slaven v Bryant [2020] NSWCATAP 168

Slaven v Bryant [2020] NSWCATAP 168

The appeal fails because the Tribunal's factual findings—that the contract was a 'do and charge' agreement, the shed was a 'dwelling', and the appellant was liable in quantum meruit for services requested—were supported by evidence, were not vitiated by legal error or bias, and the Tribunal had jurisdiction under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeals Findings of Fact' 'quantum Meruit' 'procedural Fairness' 'bias Apprehension of Bias' 'definition of Dwelling' 'jurisdiction Under Home Building Act' 'credibility of Witnesses']
['building and Construction Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['appeals Findings of Fact' 'quantum Meruit' 'procedural Fairness' 'bias Apprehension of Bias' 'definition of Dwelling' 'jurisdiction Under Home Building Act' 'credibility of Witnesses']

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 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the contract for construction of the shed was a fixed price or 'do and charge'/'costs plus' agreement" "Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction on the basis the shed was a 'dwelling' under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW)" 'Whether appellant received a benefit so as to justify a quantum meruit award when not owner of the land' 'Whether there was apprehended or actual bias due to prior professional association' 'Whether procedural fairness was denied through recording malfunction and conduct of proceedings']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal fails because the Tribunal's factual findings—that the contract was a 'do and charge' agreement, the shed was a 'dwelling', and the appellant was liable in quantum meruit for services requested—were supported by evidence, were not vitiated by legal error or bias, and the Tribunal had jurisdiction under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.']