Stevens v Gary Lewin trading as Gary Lewin Architecture [2006] NSWSC 1232

Stevens v Gary Lewin trading as Gary Lewin Architecture [2006] NSWSC 1232

Neither the plaintiff's nor the defendant's claims are 'building claims' within the meaning of s 48A(1) of the Home Building Act 1989, as claims relating to supervision of residential building work by a registered architect are excluded from the Tribunal's jurisdiction, and there is insufficient connection or collateral contractual relationship to the supply of building goods and services by the builder to bring the claims within the statutory definition.

Parties
Plaintiff: David Stevens; Defendant: Gary Lewin trading as Gary Lewin Architecture
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
Plaintiff's summons dismissed; costs to defendant.
Legal Topics
Tribunal Jurisdiction, Building Claims, Architects' Fees, Residential Building Work, Collateral Contracts
Administrative Law Building and Construction Law Tribunal Jurisdiction Building Claims Architects' Fees Residential Building Work Collateral Contracts

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Stevens

Plaintiff

Gary Lewin trading as Gary Lewin Architecture

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal had jurisdiction under Part 3A of the Home Building Act 1989 to determine the parties' claims.
  2. 2 Whether the claims were 'building claims' within the meaning of s 48A of the Home Building Act 1989.
  3. 3 Whether a contract for architectural services is a contract collateral to a building contract under s 48A.

Ratio Decidendi

Neither the plaintiff's nor the defendant's claims are 'building claims' within the meaning of s 48A(1) of the Home Building Act 1989, as claims relating to supervision of residential building work by a registered architect are excluded from the Tribunal's jurisdiction, and there is insufficient connection or collateral contractual relationship to the supply of building goods and services by the builder to bring the claims within the statutory definition.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's summons dismissed; costs to defendant.

Orders

  • Dismiss the plaintiff's summons.
  • The plaintiff is to pay the defendant's costs of the appeal.