Latest Uncategorized Articles

The recent New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal Appeal Panel decision in Chen v Austral Built Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCATAP 67 offers insights into the potential application of implied terms and statutory warranties in residential building contracts. This case raises questions about obligations beyond explicit contractual terms, particularly regarding documentation and certification requirements.

As a homeowner embarking on a building or renovation project, you’re likely focused on the exciting aspects of your new space. But what happens when your builder doesn’t provide crucial paperwork? A recent case, Chen v Austral Built Pty Ltd, sheds light on this common yet often overlooked issue. Let’s explore what this means for you and how to protect your interests.

As a homeowner facing building defects, you may be wondering if you can claim the full cost of rectifying these issues from your builder. A landmark Australian High Court case, Tabcorp Holdings Ltd v Bowen Investments Pty Ltd [2009], provides some reassuring answers.

The NSW Court of Appeal case of The Owners – Strata Plan No 84674 v Pafburn Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCA 301, marks a significant authority for Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 (NSW) claims including potentially limiting the jurisdictional reach of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) in similar matters, as established in the NCAT Appeal Panel decision of Deaves v Sigma Group NSW Pty Limited [2023] NSWCATAP 94.

Central to the The Owners – Strata Plan No 84674 v Pafburn Pty Ltd dispute was the interpretation of the statutory duty of care as outlined in the Design and Building Practitioners Act, non-delegable duties, and vicarious liability, particularly concerning proportionate liability.

Central to homeowner rights under the Home Building Act are the section 18B statutory warranties. These warranties are automatically implied in all residential building contracts, offering homeowners a safety net against substandard building practices. They cover various aspects, from the quality of the work to ensuring that the construction is completed within a reasonable time. Essentially, these warranties are designed to protect homeowners from the financial and emotional stress of dealing with construction defects or delays, amongst others.

A significant concern for many homeowners is whether they can claim compensation for the emotional toll – stress and disappointment – resulting from a builder’s breach of these statutory warranties. While traditionally, claims in contract law focus on financial losses, recent legal developments have opened avenues for homeowners to seek redress for non-economic losses, like emotional distress. The evolving legal landscape, shaped by pivotal court decisions, has begun acknowledging the impact of such breaches on a homeowner’s mental well-being.

Understanding these rights is vital for anyone facing building disputes. It empowers you to not only seek compensation for financial losses but also for the emotional distress caused by breaches of the Home Building Act’s statutory warranties.

The case of Millen v Skyview Homes Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATCD 137 is an interesting case about a renewal proceeding under Schedule 4 Clause 8 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW), known as the NCAT Act. The Respondent is a licensed builder who also owned the property in question. 

The applicant purchased the property from the respondent builder. The property, a residential dwelling, is located in South Western Sydney, NSW. A final occupation certificate for the property was issued on 25 September 2019. 

The applicant purchased the property for $703,662.45 around 27 September 2019. A Certificate of Home Warranty Insurance was obtained by the builder, but the contract amount listed was $195,789, described as a “speculative project.”