Ghama v Crew & Anor
Case
•
[2020] QCAT 149
•11 May 2020
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Ghama v Crew & Anor [2020] QCAT 149
[2020] QCAT 149
11 May 2020
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Jason Ghama sued Jennifer Crew and Precision Maintenance Specialists, trading as Precision Maintenance Specialists, for damages arising from defective building work done on his property. The dispute was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The primary issues before the court were whether the defendants were liable for negligence and whether the damages claimed by the plaintiff were recoverable.
The court examined whether the defendants owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, given that there was no formal contract between the parties. The court found that despite the absence of a signed contract, the defendants undertook to perform building works, thereby establishing a duty of care. The court also assessed whether the defendants' actions constituted a breach of that duty, finding that they did not complete the work to the proper standard, used materials not fit for purpose, and failed to obtain the necessary license. The court then addressed the measure and remoteness of damages, concluding that the costs to rectify and complete the work were directly attributable to the defendants' negligence. However, the court found that some of the consequential losses claimed by the plaintiff were too remote or not fully substantiated.
The court ordered Jennifer Crew and Precision Maintenance Specialists to pay Jason Ghama $57,834.00 in damages, along with costs of $338.20. This judgment underscores the importance of professional standards and legal compliance in construction work, and the necessity for builders to take reasonable care in their dealings with clients.
The court examined whether the defendants owed a duty of care to the plaintiff, given that there was no formal contract between the parties. The court found that despite the absence of a signed contract, the defendants undertook to perform building works, thereby establishing a duty of care. The court also assessed whether the defendants' actions constituted a breach of that duty, finding that they did not complete the work to the proper standard, used materials not fit for purpose, and failed to obtain the necessary license. The court then addressed the measure and remoteness of damages, concluding that the costs to rectify and complete the work were directly attributable to the defendants' negligence. However, the court found that some of the consequential losses claimed by the plaintiff were too remote or not fully substantiated.
The court ordered Jennifer Crew and Precision Maintenance Specialists to pay Jason Ghama $57,834.00 in damages, along with costs of $338.20. This judgment underscores the importance of professional standards and legal compliance in construction work, and the necessity for builders to take reasonable care in their dealings with clients.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Tort Law
Legal Concepts
-
Negligence
-
Compensatory Damages
-
Damages
-
Measure and Remoteness of Damages
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Citations
Ghama v Crew & Anor [2020] QCAT 149
Most Recent Citation
Keinath v Fleming [2024] QCAT 81
Cases Citing This Decision
18
McGeoch v Harrison
[2024] QCAT 314
Kroll v Kovac
[2024] QCAT 143
Burnell v Jarvis
[2024] QCAT 126
Cases Cited
9
Statutory Material Cited
1
Barbi v Brewer
[2013] QCAT 348
Astley v AusTrust Ltd
[1999] HCA 6
Astley v AusTrust Ltd
[1999] HCA 6