Huynh v Devine Building Pty Ltd [2016] NSWCATCD 93
The applicant failed to establish, on the evidence, the existence of any major defect in waterproofing or breach of contract within the applicable warranty period. As the application was brought outside the limitation period for non-major defects, and no major defect was proven, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction; therefore, the application is dismissed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 01 December 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Building Claim / Final Decision
- Outcome
- Application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['home Building Act' 'statutory Warranties' 'time Limits' 'major Defects' 'jurisdiction']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Building Claim / Final Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether statutory warranties under the Home Building Act were breached' 'Whether claims were brought within the applicable time limits' 'Whether there was a major defect in waterproofing constituting breach of warranty' 'Whether previous Department of Fair Trading orders constituted enforcement of warranty under s18E(2)' 'Which respondent was the contracting party']
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant failed to establish, on the evidence, the existence of any major defect in waterproofing or breach of contract within the applicable warranty period. As the application was brought outside the limitation period for non-major defects, and no major defect was proven, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction; therefore, the application is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Application dismissed
Orders
- ["The applicant is to pay the respondents' costs as agreed or assessed."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment