Campbell v Chronis [2022] NSWCATCD 158

Campbell v Chronis [2022] NSWCATCD 158

Because the agreed defects and the proven disputed defects were relatively modest and the builder sought to carry out rectification, the preferred outcome under s 48MA was a work order requiring rectification under licensing and supervision conditions. The owners proved defects for items 1, 2 as to dented Colorbond roof sheets, 7 and 11, but did not prove items 12 and 18. For costs, the amount truly in issue before the hearing was less than $30,000 and no special circumstances justified departing from the usual rule, so each party was to pay its own costs.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Home Building Act Building Claim for Defective Residential Building Work / Principal Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Work order made; each party to pay its own costs; leave to renew if the work order is not complied with within the period specified by the Tribunal.
Legal Topics
['defective Residential Building Work' 'statutory Warranties' 'rectification Work Order' 'costs']
['building and Construction' 'consumer and Commercial Law'] ['defective Residential Building Work' 'statutory Warranties' 'rectification Work Order' 'costs']

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 Act Building Claim for Defective Residential Building Work / Principal Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Determination of the items of defective work in dispute.' 'Whether there should be a work order pursuant to section 48MA of the Home Building Act 1989.' 'Costs.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the agreed defects and the proven disputed defects were relatively modest and the builder sought to carry out rectification, the preferred outcome under s 48MA was a work order requiring rectification under licensing and supervision conditions. The owners proved defects for items 1, 2 as to dented Colorbond roof sheets, 7 and 11, but did not prove items 12 and 18. For costs, the amount truly in issue before the hearing was less than $30,000 and no special circumstances justified departing from the usual rule, so each party was to pay its own costs.

Court Disposition

Work order made; each party to pay its own costs; leave to renew if the work order is not complied with within the period specified by the Tribunal.

Orders

  • ['Andreas Chronis and Anna Chronis must carry out the work referred to in paragraph 56 of the Reasons in accordance with the conditions of that paragraph.' 'Each party must pay their and its own costs of the proceedings.' 'Scott Campbell and Clair McCauley have leave to renew these proceedings if order 1 is not...