Max Build Pty Ltd v The Owners - Strata Plan No 54026 (No 2)

Max Build Pty Ltd initiated legal proceedings against The Owners - Strata Plan No 54026, a strata title plan in New South Wales, concerning alleged defects in construction. The dispute primarily revolved around whether defect reports prepared by a quantity surveyor qualified as business records under the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and, if so, whether these reports were admissible as evidence in the court proceedings. This case was heard and determined through an advance ruling under section 192A of the Evidence Act, focusing on the admissibility of the quantity surveyor’s reports.

The court had to decide whether the defect reports constituted business records under the Act and if they were prepared for the purpose of the proceedings. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether the opinions expressed in the reports were admissible under section 69(3)(a) of the Evidence Act and whether any limitations under section 136 of the Act applied to the admissibility of the reports. The central issue was whether the quantity surveyor's defect reports, prepared in the course of his professional duties, met the criteria for admissibility as business records and whether the court should consider the surveyor's opinions as evidence.

The court concluded that the defect reports were indeed business records prepared for the purpose of the proceedings, satisfying the criteria under section 192A of the Evidence Act. The court found that the opinions expressed in the reports were admissible under section 69(3)(a) of the Act, as they were part of the business records. However, the court also noted that the admissibility of these reports was subject to any limitations prescribed under section 136 of the Evidence Act. Ultimately, the court ruled that the defect reports were admissible as evidence in the case, subject to the relevant limitations.

The final orders of the court were that the defect reports prepared by the quantity surveyor were to be admitted as business records under the Evidence Act, and the opinions expressed within these reports were to be considered as admissible evidence in the proceedings, subject to any limitations under section 136 of the Act. The court’s decision provided clarity on the admissibility of the defect reports, setting a precedent for similar cases involving business records and expert opinions in strata title disputes.