Makkar v Solar Power Nation Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATAP 187

Makkar v Solar Power Nation Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCATAP 187

The Tribunal’s findings that the appellant did not prove on the balance of probabilities that the respondent caused the alleged roof damage, and that consequential losses were not recoverable without such proof, were open to it on the evidence. The expert report relied upon by the appellant was insufficiently...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Determination
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed to the extent it raised questions of law.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'expert Evidence' 'tribunal Procedure' 'implied Warranties Under Home Building Act' 'damages for Delay' 'standard of Review on Appeal']
['administrative Law' 'consumer Law' 'building and Construction Law'] ['leave to Appeal' 'expert Evidence' 'tribunal Procedure' 'implied Warranties Under Home Building Act' 'damages for Delay' 'standard of Review on Appeal']

Source-derived case record

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

Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Tribunal erred in its consideration of evidence regarding alleged roof damage' 'Whether the Tribunal failed to properly consider consequential damages for delay' 'Whether leave to appeal should be granted due to a substantial miscarriage of justice' 'Whether questions of law arise from the Tribunal’s finding on causation']

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal’s findings that the appellant did not prove on the balance of probabilities that the respondent caused the alleged roof damage, and that consequential losses were not recoverable without such proof, were open to it on the evidence. The expert report relied upon by the appellant was insufficiently reasoned and not independent. No question of law or miscarriage of justice sufficient to grant leave to appeal or to set aside the original Tribunal decision was identified.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed to the extent it raised questions of law.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is refused.' 'To the extent that the appeal raises questions of law, the appeal is dismissed.']