Pivovarova v Michelsen

The case of Pivovarova v Michelsen involved a dispute between the plaintiff, Tatiana Pivovarova, and the defendant, Peter B. Michelsen trading as Peter Michelsen Building Service. The crux of the dispute was over the completion of a domestic building project and the associated payments. This matter came before the court as an appeal against a decision made by a tribunal on 24 July 2013. The primary issues that the court needed to resolve were whether leave to appeal was required, whether the building project had reached practical completion, and if the builder was entitled to the practical completion stage payment less certain deductions. Additionally, the court had to determine whether the reasons provided for these deductions were sufficient or adequate.

The court found that the appeal did not require leave and proceeded to examine the issues of practical completion and the stage payment. It was determined that the tribunal had erred in its interpretation of practical completion, and the builder's entitlement to the stage payment needed re-evaluation. The reasons provided for the deductions were found to be inadequate. Consequently, the decision of 24 July 2013 was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the tribunal for a fresh determination in accordance with the law. The court also corrected the name of the defendant to reflect the correct trading name and ABN.

The court's decision mandated that specific timelines be followed for the submission of further evidence and submissions relating to costs. It also directed that the application for costs would be determined based on the submitted papers, unless an oral hearing was requested by a party. The court further scheduled a directions hearing and a further hearing to be determined at a later date. This comprehensive approach aimed to ensure that all aspects of the dispute were adequately addressed and resolved.