Jakin Constructions Pty Ltd v Shrimpton [2024] NSWCATAP 39

Jakin Constructions Pty Ltd v Shrimpton [2024] NSWCATAP 39

The Appeal Panel found no error on a question of law. The Tribunal correctly identified and applied the renewal provisions of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, considered whether to make a money order or further work order, and determined that non-compliance with the consent work order justified the money order agreed in the consent terms. The builder did not provide sufficient evidence of alternative work orders or challenge findings of fact regarding non-completion. The appeal, based solely on alleged errors of law, failed as no such errors were established. The Tribunal's critical findings were reasonable and open on the evidence.

Parties
Appellant: Jakin Constructions Pty Ltd; Respondent: Lisa and Dean Shrimpton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Disposition
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeals, Renewal Applications, Work Orders, Damages for Defective Work, Appropriate Orders on Renewal, Rectification Works, Consent Orders, Liquidated Damages
Building and Construction Law Tribunal Procedure Appeals Renewal Applications Work Orders Damages for Defective Work Appropriate Orders on Renewal Rectification Works +2 more

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 7 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jakin Constructions Pty Ltd

Appellant

Lisa and Dean Shrimpton

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Disposition

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Tribunal identified the correct legal issue in renewal proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the Tribunal failed to take into account relevant considerations
  3. 3 Whether there was a constructive failure to exercise jurisdiction

Ratio Decidendi

The Appeal Panel found no error on a question of law. The Tribunal correctly identified and applied the renewal provisions of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013, considered whether to make a money order or further work order, and determined that non-compliance with the consent work order justified the money order agreed in the consent terms. The builder did not provide sufficient evidence of alternative work orders or challenge findings of fact regarding non-completion. The appeal, based solely on alleged errors of law, failed as no such errors were established. The Tribunal's critical findings were reasonable and open on the evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • The appellant is to pay the respondents' cost of the appeal as agreed or assessed under the Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014.