15 Aug 2022
The 16 March 2016 letter was an incomplete response to a request by the appellants, the $700,000 figure was devised by the appellants and their banker, and in the factual context the respondent's provision of the letter did not amount to misleading or deceptive conduct under the Fair Trading Act; the appeal is dismissed.
25 May 2022
The RSMA imposed a predominantly administrative and co-ordination role on Hawkins with only a narrow quality-assessment function: Hawkins breached its monitoring/certification obligations where it certified completion of work that contained defects both visible to the naked eye and of sufficient seriousness as to compromise the integrity of the building or require substantial remediation; applying that test the Court found the cladding, windows, first-floor balcony structural defects and the previously identified foundations/sub-floor defects were impediments to certification and therefore wi…
19 Aug 2010
The Court approved a s48 remedial scheme as set out in Schedule A but amended contested clauses: (a) cl 1.4 to include only levied pre-scheme investigation costs as Costs, (b) cl 10.3 retained but subject to scheme-specific apportionment rules, (c) cl 15.1 amended to indemnify the Body Corporate and its agents for acts within authority but exclude wilful misconduct, fraud and acts carried out with gross negligence, and (d) cl 21 amended so MSL's total liability is capped at 11.88% of total repair Costs subject to the qualification that any Costs not benefitting all other proprietors or the Bo…