The Owners - Strata Plan No. 51077 v Meriton Apartments Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 129

The Owners - Strata Plan No. 51077 v Meriton Apartments Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 129

A contractor does not owe a non-delegable duty of care for activities of a subcontractor where the work is not hazardous and there exists no special relationship; insufficient facts were pleaded to establish the claimed duties; the misleading certificate claim was arguably tenable as Meriton adopted the certificate for council approval.

Parties
Plaintiff: The Owners - Strata Plan No. 51077; First Defendant: Meriton Apartments Pty Ltd ACN 000 644 888; Second Defendant: Micos Aluminium Pty Ltd ACN 000 351 128
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Strike Out Application
Outcome
Certain parts of the List Statement struck out; leave granted to replead; matter stood over for further directions; no order as to costs.
Legal Topics
Strike Out Claim, Non Delegable Duty of Care, Duty of Care, Misleading and Deceptive Conduct
Procedure Negligence Strike Out Claim Non Delegable Duty of Care Duty of Care Misleading and Deceptive Conduct

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Owners - Strata Plan No. 51077

Plaintiff

Meriton Apartments Pty Ltd ACN 000 644 888

First Defendant

Micos Aluminium Pty Ltd ACN 000 351 128

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Meriton owed a non-delegable duty of care for activities of Micos
  2. 2 Whether Meriton owed an ordinary duty of care in connection with the construction and certification
  3. 3 Whether Meriton engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct under s 52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974

Ratio Decidendi

A contractor does not owe a non-delegable duty of care for activities of a subcontractor where the work is not hazardous and there exists no special relationship; insufficient facts were pleaded to establish the claimed duties; the misleading certificate claim was arguably tenable as Meriton adopted the certificate for council approval.

Court Disposition

Certain parts of the List Statement struck out; leave granted to replead; matter stood over for further directions; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • Paragraph 20(a) of the List Statement struck out
  • The words 'the Meriton Non-Delegable Duty and' in paragraph 22 struck out