Roluke Pty Ltd v Lamaro Consultants Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2009] NSWCA 21

Roluke Pty Ltd v Lamaro Consultants Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2009] NSWCA 21

The Principal Judgment had only overturned the finding that the specified membrane had a 10 year life and required reassessment on the basis of a 20 year life. Roluke had not appealed the primary Judge's approach of allowing rectification membrane replacement only during the expected life of the specified membrane, nor any finding that replacements after that period would be more frequent than for the specified membrane. The damages award therefore should be increased only by the net present value of two additional rectification membrane renewals and associated business interruption in 2017 and 2022, producing judgment for $1,257,448. The primary Judge's two thirds costs order remained...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Concerning Reassessment of Damages and Costs / Consequential Orders on Written Submissions Following Principal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; damages judgment varied; respondents ordered to pay two thirds of appellants' appeal costs.
Legal Topics
['reassessment of Damages' 'costs of Appeal' 'rectification of Building Defects' 'waterproof Membrane Replacement' 'business Interruption' "consulting Structural Engineer's Duty to Exercise Reasonable Skill and Diligence"]
['damages' 'costs' 'professional Negligence'] ['reassessment of Damages' 'costs of Appeal' 'rectification of Building Defects' 'waterproof Membrane Replacement' 'business Interruption' "consulting Structural Engineer's Duty to Exercise Reasonable Skill and Diligence"]

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

Civil Appeal Concerning Reassessment of Damages and Costs / Consequential Orders on Written Submissions Following Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the damages award should be adjusted to reflect a 20 year expected life of the specified membrane rather than 10 years.' 'Whether Roluke was entitled to damages for removing and reinstating the rectification membrane at five yearly intervals over the 60 year life of the building.' "Whether the primary Judge's order that Lamaro pay two thirds of Roluke's costs at first instance should be disturbed." 'What costs order should be made for the appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Principal Judgment had only overturned the finding that the specified membrane had a 10 year life and required reassessment on the basis of a 20 year life. Roluke had not appealed the primary Judge's approach of allowing rectification membrane replacement only during the expected life of the specified membrane, nor any finding that replacements after that period would be more frequent than for the specified membrane. The damages award therefore should be increased only by the net present value of two additional rectification membrane renewals and associated business interruption in 2017 and 2022, producing judgment for $1,257,448. The primary Judge's two thirds costs order remained...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; damages judgment varied; respondents ordered to pay two thirds of appellants' appeal costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be allowed in part.' 'The judgment in favour of the plaintiffs (appellants) entered by Nicholas J on 18 May 2007 in the sum of $912,245 be set aside and in lieu thereof judgment be entered in favour of the plaintiffs (appellants) in the sum of $1,257,448.' "The respondents pay two thirds of the...