Brett Shearer and Bronwyn Shearer v Urban Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd and Anthony John Cosco

Case

[2015] NSWCATCD 3

10 February 2015


Details
AGLC Case Decision Date
Brett Shearer and Bronwyn Shearer v Urban Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd and Anthony John Cosco [2015] NSWCATCD 3 [2015] NSWCATCD 3 10 February 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The matter between Brett Shearer and Bronwyn Shearer and Urban Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd and Anthony John Cosco was heard before the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. The dispute arose from a contractual agreement between the parties regarding the construction of a house on the Shearers' property. The Shearers alleged that Urban Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd and Anthony John Cosco had failed to complete the construction work to the agreed standard and engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by providing incomplete work. The Shearers sought restitution for the incomplete work and damages for the misleading and deceptive conduct.

The Tribunal was tasked with determining whether Urban Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd and Anthony John Cosco were liable for the incomplete work and misleading and deceptive conduct. The Shearers argued that the defendants had breached the terms of the contract by failing to complete the work to the agreed standard and that they had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by providing incomplete work. The defendants, on the other hand, argued that the Shearers had not provided them with clear instructions and that they had completed the work to the best of their ability.

After considering the evidence presented by both parties, the Tribunal found that Urban Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd and Anthony John Cosco were liable for the incomplete work and misleading and deceptive conduct. The Tribunal found that the defendants had failed to complete the work to the agreed standard and that they had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by providing incomplete work. The Tribunal ordered Urban Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd to pay the Shearers the sum of $540.00 within 21 days of the date of the order. The Tribunal also noted that either party could make a costs application in these proceedings.
Details

Areas of Law

  • Consumer Law

Legal Concepts

  • Restitution

  • Misleading and Deceptive Conduct

  • Costs

Actions
Download as PDF Download as Word Document


Cases Citing This Decision

0

Cases Cited

12

Statutory Material Cited

5

Field v Dettman [2013] NSWCA 147