Bogdanic v Rossiter t/as RNK Concreting

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Bogdanic v Rossiter t/as RNK Concreting [2024] QCAT 173

PARTIES:

ANNA BOGDANIC

(applicant)

v

RHYS ROSSITER T/AS RNK CONCRETING

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

BDL334-22

MATTER TYPE:

Building matters

DELIVERED ON:

22 April 2024

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Deane

ORDERS:

1.     Rhys Rossiter t/as RNK Concreting is to pay Anna Bogdanic the amount of $2,310 (incl GST) by 4.00pm on 24 May 2024.

2.     Rhys Rossiter t/as RNK Concreting is to pay Anna Bogdanic costs fixed in the amount of $367 by 4.00pm on 24 May 2024.

CATCHWORDS:

CONTRACTS – BUILDING, ENGINEERING AND RELATED CONTRACTS – THE CONTRACT – GENERALLY – where informal contract not a regulated contract

CONTRACTS – BUILDING, ENGINEERING AND RELATED CONTRACTS – PERFORMANCE OF WORK – REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT – DAMAGES – MEASURE OF – whether works defective in breach of contract – assessment of damages

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – COSTS – GENERAL MATTERS – POWER TO AWARD GENERALLY – STATUTORY BASIS GENERALLY – whether costs should be awarded – where non-compliance with directions

Human Rights Act (Qld) 2019, s 8, s 9, s 11, s 13, s 24, s 25, s 31, s 48

Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld), s 3, s 77, Schedule 1B s 1, s 4, s 5, s 13, s 14, Schedule 2

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld), s 3, s 48, s 100, s 102, s 107

Bellgrove v Eldridge (1954) 90 CLR 613

Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2011] QCATA 142

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION: This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Mrs Bogdanic, a homeowner, engaged Mr Rossiter, a licensed concreting contractor, to perform concreting work.  Mrs Bogdanic says there are multiple cracks in the driveway and that the driveway has not been rectified by him despite request.

2. Mrs Bogdanic initially sought orders that Mr Rossiter rectify the defective driveway or refund the amount paid of $2,310 to enable her to have the driveway removed and the work performed by another contractor and for costs in the amount of $367.[1] More recently she sought orders that Mr Rossiter pay $2,677 including costs.

   [1]Application for domestic building disputes on 18 November 2022 (Application).

3. A person involved in a building dispute may apply to the Tribunal to decide the dispute[2] provided the person has complied with a process established by the Queensland Building and Construction Commission (QBCC) to attempt to resolve the dispute.[3] Mrs Bogdanic attached to the Application evidence of complying with QBCC pre-proceeding dispute resolution processes enlivening the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.[4] 

   [2]Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld), s 77(1) (QBCC Act).

   [3]Ibid, s 77(2).

   [4]Letter dated 15 November 2022.

4. A building dispute is defined to include a domestic building dispute.[5] Domestic building dispute is defined to include a claim or dispute arising between…