Building (Amendment) Act (No 2) 1983 (ACT)

The parties involved in the case were the Building Controller and the Minister of State for Territories and Local Government. The dispute centered on the Building (Amendment) Ordinance (No 2) 1983 (ACT), which amended the Building Ordinance 1972 (ACT). The case was heard in the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory.

The key legal issues the court needed to decide were whether the Building Controller, a Deputy Building Controller, or a building inspector could be held personally liable for acts done or omitted in good faith while exercising their powers under the Building Ordinance 1972 (ACT). Additionally, the court had to determine whether the Commonwealth would still be liable for such acts or omissions despite the immunity provided by the amendment.

The court held that the amendment to the Building Ordinance 1972 (ACT) provided immunity from personal liability for the Building Controller, Deputy Building Controller, and building inspectors for acts done or omitted in good faith. The court further found that the amendment did not affect any liability that the Commonwealth would have under other provisions of law. The court's reasoning was based on the plain language of the amendment, which explicitly stated that no action or proceeding would lie against these individuals for acts done or omitted in good faith.

The court's decision resulted in a ruling that the Building Controller, Deputy Building Controller, and building inspectors were not personally liable for acts done or omitted in good faith under the Building Ordinance 1972 (ACT). The court's decision clarified the scope of immunity provided by the amendment and the continued liability of the Commonwealth for any acts or omissions not covered by the immunity.