General Constructions Pty Ltd v Peterson

General Constructions Pty Ltd (the appellant) appealed to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The dispute concerned the interpretation of a building contract and the appellant's liability for alleged defects in work performed by the respondent, Mr. Peterson. The core of the disagreement lay in whether the respondent had completed the work to the satisfaction of the appellant's architect, a condition precedent to final payment under the contract.

The High Court was required to determine whether the architect's certificate of practical completion was conclusive evidence of the satisfactory completion of the work, or whether the respondent could still claim for work that was allegedly defective. A further issue was whether the appellant had waived its right to rely on the architect's dissatisfaction by continuing to occupy and use the building.

The Court held that the architect's certificate, in the absence of fraud or collusion, was indeed conclusive evidence of the satisfactory completion of the work as required by the contract. The judges reasoned that the contract clearly stipulated that the certificate would be final and binding, and to allow the appellant to re-litigate the quality of the work would undermine the contractual agreement. Furthermore, the Court found that the appellant's continued use of the building after the certificate was issued amounted to a waiver of any right to complain about defects that were apparent at the time of occupation.

The appeal was dismissed, with the High Court affirming the decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.