Asset Building Certifiers Pty Ltd v Hyblewski

Asset Building Certifiers Pty Ltd (the appellant) appealed to the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory against a decision of the Magistrates Court. The dispute concerned alleged defective building works for which the respondent, Mr Hyblewski, sought damages from the appellant.

The primary legal issues before the Supreme Court were the nature of the contractual duty owed by the appellant to the respondent, and whether the respondent had proven that the appellant's conduct caused the loss he claimed. The Court also considered whether the trial judge's finding on the issue of causation was legally open. The appeal also involved consideration of sections 44(2)(a) and 44(5) of the *Building Act 2004* (ACT).

The Court found that the appellant owed a contractual duty to the respondent to exercise reasonable care and skill in carrying out its functions as a building certifier. The Court analysed the evidence and concluded that the trial judge's finding of causation was open on the facts and that the respondent had sufficiently proven his loss. The Court affirmed the principles of contractual interpretation and the assessment of damages in cases of defective building works.

The appeal was dismissed.