Dial D v Kingston Building

The proceedings arose from a dispute between the builder, Kingston Building, and the homeowner, Dial D, concerning the issuance of a final certificate under a building contract. The homeowner sought to recover the balance of the purchase price from the deposit held by Kingston Building, claiming that the final certificate was not issued in time. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The central legal issue was whether the final certificate was issued within the stipulated timeframe, and if not, whether the corresponding date rule applied to extend that timeframe.

The court examined the terms of the contract, which stipulated that the final certificate must be issued within 28 days of practical completion. The homeowner argued that the final certificate was issued two days late, rendering it invalid. The builder countered that under the corresponding date rule, the certificate should be considered valid if it was issued within a reasonable time after practical completion. The court found that while the certificate was indeed issued two days late, the delay was minor and did not materially affect the homeowner's ability to claim the balance of the purchase price. The corresponding date rule was applied to deem the late issuance as acceptable, as it was within a reasonable time frame.

The Supreme Court held that the final certificate, despite being issued two days late, was valid under the corresponding date rule. The court emphasised the importance of practical completion and the minor delay did not undermine the purpose of the final certificate. Consequently, the homeowner was entitled to recover the balance of the purchase price from the deposit held by the builder. The court ordered the builder to release the balance of the purchase price to the homeowner within 14 days of the judgment.