Liebe v Molloy

In *Liebe v Molloy*, the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Western Australia considered an appeal concerning an architect's claim for fees against a building owner. The dispute arose from an agreement for architectural services, where the architect had provided plans and specifications for a building. The owner subsequently engaged a contractor to construct the building based on these plans. The core of the disagreement lay in whether the architect was entitled to the full amount of his agreed fee, or if certain deductions were permissible due to alleged deficiencies in the plans.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the architect had fulfilled his contractual obligations to the owner. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the plans and specifications provided by the architect were sufficient and accurate for the purpose of constructing the building, and if any alleged defects in those plans constituted a breach of contract that would entitle the owner to withhold part of the architect's fees. The Court also considered the extent to which an architect's duty of care extended to ensuring the contractor's work was performed in accordance with the plans.

The Court reasoned that the architect's primary obligation was to provide competent and suitable plans and specifications. It was held that the architect was entitled to his full fee, as the evidence did not establish that the plans were fundamentally flawed or that the architect had breached his duty of care. The Court found that any issues that arose during construction were more attributable to the contractor's execution of the work rather than inherent defects in the architect's design. The principles applied centred on the contractual obligations of an architect and the standard of care expected in the provision of architectural services.