Nutek Constructions Pty Ltd v Slotwinski [2021] NSWSC 832

Nutek Constructions Pty Ltd v Slotwinski [2021] NSWSC 832

Leave to appeal is refused because Nutek is bound by the way it conducted its case before both the Tribunal and the Appeal Panel; the damages methodology was adopted at Nutek's urging; no error of principle or question of general public importance arises, and any alleged error does not result in injustice. Accordingly, there is no basis for granting leave to appeal against either the substantive decision or costs orders of the Appeal Panel.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal (civil) / Supreme Court Decision on Leave to Appeal From Appeal Panel of NCAT
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused; proceedings dismissed; costs to be paid by plaintiff.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'damages Assessment' 'repudiation of Contract' 'set Off as Defence' 'jurisdiction Limits' 'costs Orders']
['appeals' 'contract Law' 'building and Construction'] ['leave to Appeal' 'damages Assessment' 'repudiation of Contract' 'set Off as Defence' 'jurisdiction Limits' 'costs Orders']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal (civil) / Supreme Court Decision on Leave to Appeal From Appeal Panel of NCAT

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted against Appeal Panel decisions of NCAT concerning quantum meruit and costs' 'Whether there was evidence before the Appeal Panel regarding payment of further works and contract completion costs' 'Whether damages methodology adopted by Appeal Panel was in error and if so, whether plaintiff is precluded from complaining by conduct of case below' 'Whether the Appeal Panel erred in construing the building contract terms including set-off and exclusions']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal is refused because Nutek is bound by the way it conducted its case before both the Tribunal and the Appeal Panel; the damages methodology was adopted at Nutek's urging; no error of principle or question of general public importance arises, and any alleged error does not result in injustice. Accordingly, there is no basis for granting leave to appeal against either the substantive decision or costs orders of the Appeal Panel.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused; proceedings dismissed; costs to be paid by plaintiff.

Orders

  • ['In proceedings 2020/327546, leave to appeal is refused.' 'The summons in proceedings 2020/327546 is dismissed.' 'The plaintiff is to pay the costs of those proceedings.' 'In proceedings 2021/158356, leave to appeal is refused.' 'The summons in proceedings 2021/158356 is dismissed.' 'The plaintiff is to pay the...