Geneville Constructions Pty Ltd v Leslight (No 2)

Case [2019] NSWDC 172

District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Geneville Constructions Pty Ltd v Leslight (No 2) [2019] NSWDC 172
Hearing dates: 27 November 2017 – 30 November 2017; 9 April 2018 – 13 April 2018; 21 May 2018 - 23 May 2018; 30 November 2018 (adoption of referee report hearing); 20 February 2019 (written submissions); 13 and 18 March 2019 (written submissions); 27 March 2019 (written submissions); 11 April 2019 (oral submissions)
Date of orders: 09 May 2019
Decision date: 09 May 2019
Jurisdiction:Civil
Before: Dicker SC DCJ
Decision:

(1) Judgment for the plaintiff in the Statement of Claim proceedings.
(2) The Cross-Claim is dismissed;
(3) The defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings as agreed or assessed;
(4) Liberty to the parties to apply within 21 days for a variation of the order in (3) above;
(5) The parties are to bring in agreed Short Minutes of Order reflecting these reasons and including any claim for interest within 14 days;
(6) The exhibits are to be retained for a period of three months.

Catchwords: Building and construction - absence of a formal detailed written contract between the parties – terms of alleged contract – extensive factual dispute between main witnesses on numerous issues - entitlement of plaintiff to recover under alleged contract - alternative claim for quantum meruit - extent of any entitlement of plaintiff to recover compensation - claim by the defendant client for damages for alleged defects, delays and other losses
Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), section 161
Home Building Act 1989 (NSW), sections 7, 7A and 10
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
Cases Cited: Brambles Holdings Ltd v Bathurst City Council [2001] NSWCA 61; (2001) 53 NSWLR 153
Croucher v Cachia [2016] NSWCA 132
Cubillo v Commonwealth (No 2) [2000] FCA 1084; (2000) 103 FCR 1 at [18]-[123]
Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22; (2003) 214 CLR 118
Geneville Constructions Pty Ltd v Leslight [2018] NSWDC 384
Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 156 ER 145
Husain v O & S Holdings (Vic) Pty Ltd [2005] VSCA 269
Kriketos v Livschitz [2009] NSWCA 96
Leading Edge Events Australia Pty Ltd v Kiri Te Kanawa [2007] NSWSC 228
Lumbers v W Cook Builders Pty Ltd (in liquidation) (2008) 232 CLR 635; [2008] HCA 27
New South Wales Housing Authority v Diab [2015] NSWCA 133
Nichols v Earth Spirit Home Pty Ltd [2015] QCA 219
O’Connor v Leaw Pty Ltd (1997) 42 NSWLR 285
Pavey & Matthews v Paul (1987) 162 CLR 221; [1987] HCA 5
Progressive Pod Properties Pty Ltd v A & M Green Investments Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 225
Project Blue Sky v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28; (1998) 194 CLR 355
Proprietors of Strata Scheme 3618 v Costin Roe Consulting [2010] NSWSC 1049
Sopov v Kane Constructions Pty Ltd (No 2) [2009] VSCA 141
Statewide Developments Pty Ltd v Higgins [2011] NSWCA 35
The Owners Strata Plan No 57164 v Yau [2017] NSWCA…

Continue reading Geneville Constructions Pty Ltd v Leslight (No 2)

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Geneville Constructions Pty Ltd v Leslight (No 2) [2019] NSWDC 172
Case
[2019] NSWDC 172
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Geneville Constructions Pty Ltd sued Leslight over a construction project where no formal contract was in place. The dispute centred on the existence and terms of an alleged oral agreement, with significant disagreements between the parties' key witnesses. Leslight counterclaimed for damages due to alleged defects and delays. The court had to decide whether Geneville was entitled to recover under the alleged contract, an alternative claim for quantum meruit, and the extent of Leslight's entitlement to damages.

The court examined the extensive factual disputes between the parties' witnesses, finding them largely unpersuasive. It held that Geneville was entitled to recover under the alleged contract, rejecting Leslight's counterclaims for damages. The court found that Geneville had provided detailed evidence of the work performed and the agreed prices, which Leslight had accepted. The court concluded that Leslight's witnesses' evidence lacked credibility and was not persuasive enough to overturn Geneville's claims.

The court granted judgment to Geneville for the amount claimed, dismissed Leslight's counterclaim, and ordered Leslight to pay Geneville's costs. The court also provided liberty to the parties to apply for a variation of the costs order within 21 days and directed the parties to prepare Short Minutes of Order within 14 days. The exhibits were to be retained for three months.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) Judgment for the plaintiff in the Statement of Claim proceedings.

(2) The Cross-Claim is dismissed;

(3) The defendant is to pay the plaintiff's costs of the proceedings as agreed or assessed;

(4) Liberty to the parties to apply within 21 days for a variation of the order in (3) above;

(5) The parties are to bring in agreed Short Minutes of Order reflecting these reasons and including any claim for interest within 14 days;

(6) The exhibits are to be retained for a period of three months.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.