Culina v Timilty Constructions PL [2022] NSWCATCD 109

Culina v Timilty Constructions PL [2022] NSWCATCD 109

Money order is appropriate due to severe relational breakdown and lack of confidence in builder's remediation abilities; owner's expert evidence on defects and cost of remedial works accepted as proved, requiring the respondent to pay $61,012.08 for rectification.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Building Defects Claim / Final Determination
Outcome
Money order in applicant's favour; costs reserved for further application and submissions.
Legal Topics
['home Building—statutory Warranties' 'defective Work' 'work Orders Vs. Money Orders' 'costs']

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

Building Defects Claim / Final Determination

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondent builder is liable for defective waterproofing and drainage work under statutory warranties' 'Whether a work order or money order is appropriate given relational breakdown' 'How damages for defective work should be quantified']

Ratio Decidendi

Money order is appropriate due to severe relational breakdown and lack of confidence in builder's remediation abilities; owner's expert evidence on defects and cost of remedial works accepted as proved, requiring the respondent to pay $61,012.08 for rectification.

Court Disposition

Money order in applicant's favour; costs reserved for further application and submissions.

Orders

  • ['Order that the respondent Timilty Constructions PL pay Dean Culina $61,012.08 on or before 21 July 2022.' 'Any party wishing to seek an order for costs is to file and serve application and submissions on or before 7 July 2022.' 'Any submissions in response are to be filed and served on or before 21 July 2022.'...