Modern Design Wardrobes Pty Ltd v Clayton [2021] NSWCATAP 378

Modern Design Wardrobes Pty Ltd v Clayton [2021] NSWCATAP 378

Leave was refused and the appeal dismissed because Modern Design did not demonstrate any error of law or basis for concluding that it may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice. The Tribunal's reasons showed a careful analysis of the complaints and evidence, no denial of procedural fairness, and no failure to respond to argument. The Tribunal was entitled to prefer the respondents' evidence as to numerous defects and unsatisfactory installation, and it gave relevant reasons for exercising its discretion to make a money order rather than a work order, including the animosity between the parties and the respondents' opposition to Modern Design returning to their premises.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Internal Appeal From a Consumer and Commercial Division Home Building Consumer Claim Decision / Appeal Panel Decision on Leave to Appeal and Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; stay lifted; time for payment and removal extended to specified dates.
Legal Topics
['consumer Claim' 'supply and Installation of Wardrobes' 'defects in Design and Installation' 'statutory Warranties' 'leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'money Order' 'work Order and Rectification']
['administrative Law' 'consumer Law' 'home Building Law' 'appeals'] ['consumer Claim' 'supply and Installation of Wardrobes' 'defects in Design and Installation' 'statutory Warranties' 'leave to Appeal' 'substantial Miscarriage of Justice' 'money Order' 'work Order and Rectification']

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

Internal Appeal From a Consumer and Commercial Division Home Building Consumer Claim Decision / Appeal Panel Decision on Leave to Appeal and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted under s 80(2)(b) and Sch 4 cl 12 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW).' "Whether the Tribunal's decision was not fair and equitable or was against the weight of evidence." "Whether the Tribunal failed to understand or consider Modern Design's evidence and rights." 'Whether the Tribunal erred in making a money order rather than a work order for rectification under s 48MA of the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW).' 'Whether costs of removal should be awarded against Modern Design.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused and the appeal dismissed because Modern Design did not demonstrate any error of law or basis for concluding that it may have suffered a substantial miscarriage of justice. The Tribunal's reasons showed a careful analysis of the complaints and evidence, no denial of procedural fairness, and no failure to respond to argument. The Tribunal was entitled to prefer the respondents' evidence as to numerous defects and unsatisfactory installation, and it gave relevant reasons for exercising its discretion to make a money order rather than a work order, including the animosity between the parties and the respondents' opposition to Modern Design returning to their premises.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; appeal dismissed; stay lifted; time for payment and removal extended to specified dates.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is refused.' 'The appeal is dismissed.' 'The stay granted on 10 September 2021 is lifted.' 'The time for payment of the money order referred to in order (1) made on 6 August 2021 is extended to 3 December 2021.' 'The removal of the wardrobes as referred to in order (2) made on 6 August 2021 is to...