Burnell v Jarvis

Burnell v Jarvis involved a dispute between Carol Ester Burnell and Christopher Andrew Jarvis concerning a building contract. The matter was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Burnell engaged Jarvis to undertake building work on her property, but the contract did not comply with the requirements of the Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld), rendering it ineffective. The Tribunal was tasked with determining the consequences of the contract's ineffectiveness and assessing any damages resulting from Jarvis's breach of duty in performing the building work.

The primary legal issues were whether the ineffectiveness of the contract had any implications for Burnell's ability to recover damages from Jarvis and if so, the extent of those damages. The Tribunal had to determine whether Burnell could still claim damages for Jarvis's breach of duty despite the contract's invalidity. The court also needed to consider the standard of care expected from a builder in undertaking such work and whether Jarvis breached this standard, leading to the damages claimed by Burnell.

The Tribunal found that despite the contract's ineffectiveness, Burnell could still claim damages for Jarvis's breach of duty. The court assessed the damages based on the breach of duty and the subsequent harm caused by Jarvis's actions. The Tribunal ordered Jarvis to pay Burnell $12,083.50 by 4.00pm on 2 April 2024, representing the damages for the breach of duty. The orders also detailed the procedures for any application for costs, including deadlines for submissions and evidence, and the process for deciding the application.