PLASTERTECH SYSTEMS LIMITED v PARBHU [2018] NZHC 1660

PLASTERTECH SYSTEMS LIMITED v PARBHU [2018] NZHC 1660

The High Court allowed the appeal in part, holding that under the settlement agreement's wording obligating appellants to pay 'any and all sums required to be paid ... to complete the Remedial Work' the engineer's fees and the itemised other costs were recoverable; the $59,000 labour/materials figure was wrongly included and an arithmetic error in combined settlement payments was corrected; the District Court judgment of $265,156.44 was quashed and replaced with a judgment for $190,117.54, with interest and costs awarded and appellants entitled to appeal costs on a 2B basis.

Citation
[2018] NZHC 1660
Parties
First Appellant: Plastertech Systems Limited; Second Appellant: Keith Murray Whitlow; Respondents: Champaklal Parbhu; Vidaywati Patel; Shantilal Patel (as Trustees of the C Parbhu Family Trust)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
New Zealand
Judgment Date
6 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S124 District Court Act 2016 / Judgment on Appeal (high Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; District Court judgment quashed and replaced with reduced judgment in favour of respondents.
Legal Topics
Quantification of Damages, Settlement Agreement Interpretation, Recovery of Expert/engineer Costs, Betterment Deductions, Costs and Interest
Construction Law Contract Law Damages Property Law Weathertight Homes Litigation Quantification of Damages Settlement Agreement Interpretation Recovery of Expert/engineer Costs +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plastertech Systems Limited

First Appellant

Keith Murray Whitlow

Second Appellant

Champaklal Parbhu; Vidaywati Patel; Shantilal Patel (as Trustees of the C Parbhu Family Trust)

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under S124 District Court Act 2016 / Judgment on Appeal (high Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the engineer's fees were recoverable under the settlement agreement
  2. 2 Whether the claimant proved other claimed costs on the balance of probabilities
  3. 3 Whether the $59,000 labor and materials allowance was recoverable

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court allowed the appeal in part, holding that under the settlement agreement's wording obligating appellants to pay 'any and all sums required to be paid ... to complete the Remedial Work' the engineer's fees and the itemised other costs were recoverable; the $59,000 labour/materials figure was wrongly included and an arithmetic error in combined settlement payments was corrected; the District Court judgment of $265,156.44 was quashed and replaced with a judgment for $190,117.54, with interest and costs awarded and appellants entitled to appeal costs on a 2B basis.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; District Court judgment quashed and replaced with reduced judgment in favour of respondents.

Orders

  • Judgment for respondents in the sum of NZD 190117.54
  • Interest payable on that judgment in the sum of NZD 6823.82