Martin v Giro Construction Group Pty Limited [2015] NSWCATCD 133

Martin v Giro Construction Group Pty Limited [2015] NSWCATCD 133

The Tribunal was satisfied it had jurisdiction and that the applicant proved breaches of statutory warranties for the rear balcony/support beams, the front/side terrace, and the pool waterproofing. Although the applicant did not prove all disputed works were within the builder's scope, the Tribunal found the builder was responsible for the rear balcony/support beams, for the angles and waterproofing causing water entry at the front/side terrace, and for the pool waterproofing. The applicant failed to establish liability for the upper side balcony water entry and leaking around balcony posts. Rectification costs of $123,318.14 were therefore awarded.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Home Building Claim for Alleged Breaches of Statutory Warranty / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Application allowed in part; respondent ordered to pay the applicant $123,318.14 immediately, with costs to be determined on the papers if pursued.
Legal Topics
['scope of Works' 'successor in Title' 'defects' 'breach of Statutory Warranty' 'rectification Damages']
['home Building' 'building and Construction' 'consumer and Commercial'] ['scope of Works' 'successor in Title' 'defects' 'breach of Statutory Warranty' 'rectification Damages']

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

Home Building Claim for Alleged Breaches of Statutory Warranty / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to determine the building claim brought within time under the Home Building Act (NSW) 1989.' "Whether the applicant, as successor in title, established that disputed defective works were within the respondent builder's scope of works." 'Whether defects in the rear balcony and support beams breached statutory warranties and required demolition and reconstruction.' 'Whether water entry from the front/side terrace resulted from defective works for which the builder was responsible.' "Whether water entry to the upper side balcony and leaking around balcony posts were caused by works within the builder's scope." 'Whether the builder performed defective waterproofing works to the pool and was liable for rectification costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal was satisfied it had jurisdiction and that the applicant proved breaches of statutory warranties for the rear balcony/support beams, the front/side terrace, and the pool waterproofing. Although the applicant did not prove all disputed works were within the builder's scope, the Tribunal found the builder was responsible for the rear balcony/support beams, for the angles and waterproofing causing water entry at the front/side terrace, and for the pool waterproofing. The applicant failed to establish liability for the upper side balcony water entry and leaking around balcony posts. Rectification costs of $123,318.14 were therefore awarded.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; respondent ordered to pay the applicant $123,318.14 immediately, with costs to be determined on the papers if pursued.

Orders

  • ['The respondent is to pay the applicant the amount of $123,318.14 immediately.' 'In the event that she intends to make an application for costs, the applicant is to provide any documents and submissions in relation to costs to the respondent and the Tribunal, either in person or by post by 15 November 2015.' 'The...