Kazzi v KR Properties Global Pty Ltd t/as AK Properties Group
Case
•
[2024] NSWCA 143
•07 June 2024
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Kazzi v KR Properties Global Pty Ltd t/as AK Properties Group [2024] NSWCA 143
[2024] NSWCA 143
07 June 2024
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The dispute in *Kazzi v KR Properties Global Pty Ltd t/as AK Properties Group* concerned allegations of negligence in the construction of a residential building. The parties involved were the owner of the property (the respondent) and the nominated supervisor of the works (the appellant). The case was heard in the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the nominated supervisor owed a duty of care to the owner, whether this duty had been breached by directing construction contrary to approved plans and by failing to ensure the works were carried out in a proper and workmanlike manner, and whether this negligence caused the owner to incur additional interest on borrowings due to delays in completion. The court also considered the assessment of damages, specifically the application of the *Hungerfords* interest principle in circumstances where multiple causal factors contributed to the delay.
The Court of Appeal found that the nominated supervisor did owe a duty of care to the owner. The court reasoned that the supervisor's actions in directing construction otherwise than in accordance with the approved plans constituted a breach of that duty. Furthermore, the court determined that the supervisor's negligence was a cause of the owner's loss. The court allowed the cross-appeal, setting aside the previous judgment and entering judgment for the cross-claimants against the cross-defendant for a specified sum, plus interest. The appeal itself was dismissed.
The primary legal issues before the court were whether the nominated supervisor owed a duty of care to the owner, whether this duty had been breached by directing construction contrary to approved plans and by failing to ensure the works were carried out in a proper and workmanlike manner, and whether this negligence caused the owner to incur additional interest on borrowings due to delays in completion. The court also considered the assessment of damages, specifically the application of the *Hungerfords* interest principle in circumstances where multiple causal factors contributed to the delay.
The Court of Appeal found that the nominated supervisor did owe a duty of care to the owner. The court reasoned that the supervisor's actions in directing construction otherwise than in accordance with the approved plans constituted a breach of that duty. Furthermore, the court determined that the supervisor's negligence was a cause of the owner's loss. The court allowed the cross-appeal, setting aside the previous judgment and entering judgment for the cross-claimants against the cross-defendant for a specified sum, plus interest. The appeal itself was dismissed.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Negligence & Tort
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Breach
-
Causation
-
Costs
-
Damages
-
Duty of Care
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
The Owners Strata Plan 80867 v Da Silva [2024] NSWDC 263
Cases Citing This Decision
3
Kapila v Monument Building Group Pty Ltd
[2025] NSWSC 1306
Oxford (NSW) Pty Ltd v KR Properties Global Pty Ltd t/as AK Properties Group ABN 62 971 068 965 (No 7)
[2024] NSWSC 757
The Owners Strata Plan 80867 v Da Silva
[2024] NSWDC 263