A G and J R Keevers trading as Frontline Fences v Colin McQueen and Jennifer McQueen and Hadomall Pty Ltd Colin McQueen and Jennifer McQueen and Hadomall Pty Ltd v A G and J R Keevers trading as Frontline Fences
Case
•
[2014] NSWCATCD 137
•23 July 2014
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
A G and J R Keevers trading as Frontline Fences v Colin McQueen and Jennifer McQueen and Hadomall Pty Ltd Colin McQueen and Jennifer McQueen and Hadomall Pty Ltd v A G and J R Keevers trading as Frontline Fences [2014] NSWCATCD 137
[2014] NSWCATCD 137
23 July 2014
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The proceedings concern a dispute between the home builders, Colin McQueen and Jennifer McQueen trading as Hadomall Pty Ltd, and the home owners, A G and J R Keevers trading as Frontline Fences. The home owners brought an action for breach of a warranty that a fence built by the home builders would be suitable for the purpose for which it was intended and constructed in a proper and workmanlike manner. The home builders counterclaimed for non-payment of the work completed. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The court was required to determine the existence and breach of the warranty, the extent of the breach, and the appropriate remedy for the home owners.
The court found that the warranty was clear and unambiguous and that the fence constructed by the home builders did not meet the required standard. The fence had several defects, including missing pickets, gaps, and slats that were not fixed properly. The home builders did not take reasonable steps to ensure that the fence was constructed in a proper and workmanlike manner. The court also found that the home builders had not taken reasonable steps to remedy the defects after being notified by the home owners. The court rejected the home builders' counterclaim for non-payment of the work completed, finding that the home owners were entitled to withhold payment due to the breach of warranty.
The court ordered the home builders to pay the home owners the sum of $2,880.00 for the cost of remedying the defects in the fence. The court also ordered that the home builders were not entitled to any further payment for the work completed. The court found that the home owners were entitled to a remedy for breach of warranty and that the order for payment of the cost of remedying the defects was just and equitable. The court did not award any costs to either party.
The court found that the warranty was clear and unambiguous and that the fence constructed by the home builders did not meet the required standard. The fence had several defects, including missing pickets, gaps, and slats that were not fixed properly. The home builders did not take reasonable steps to ensure that the fence was constructed in a proper and workmanlike manner. The court also found that the home builders had not taken reasonable steps to remedy the defects after being notified by the home owners. The court rejected the home builders' counterclaim for non-payment of the work completed, finding that the home owners were entitled to withhold payment due to the breach of warranty.
The court ordered the home builders to pay the home owners the sum of $2,880.00 for the cost of remedying the defects in the fence. The court also ordered that the home builders were not entitled to any further payment for the work completed. The court found that the home owners were entitled to a remedy for breach of warranty and that the order for payment of the cost of remedying the defects was just and equitable. The court did not award any costs to either party.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Contract Law
-
Consumer Law
Legal Concepts
-
Contract Formation
-
Breach of Contract
-
Implied Terms
-
Compensatory Damages
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
0
Statutory Material Cited
1