Legal Research
Cases
Provincial Homes v Doyle

Provincial Homes v Doyle

Case [2004] NSWSC 624 15 July 2004

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

CITATION: Provincial Homes v Doyle & Ors [2004] NSWSC 624

HEARING DATE(S): 3 May 2004

JUDGMENT DATE:
15 July 2004

JURISDICTION:
Common Law Division
Administrative Law List

JUDGMENT OF: Wood CJatCL at 1

DECISION: I order that the orders of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal in this matter, made on 31 March 2003, be set aside. I order the first and second respondents to pay the appellant's costs. In the event of the legislation applying, I direct that those respondents are to have a certificate under the Suitors Fund Act.

CATCHWORDS: Appeal from Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal - Tribunal's jurisdiction to hear application - categorisation of building claim under s 89B Home Building Act 1989 - definition of building services within s 84 - breach of contract.

LEGISLATION CITED: Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 - 67(8)
Home Building Act 1989 -s s 7, 10, 84, 89B, 89B(1)

CASES CITED: Booker Industries Pty Limited v Wilson Parking (Qld) Pty Limited (1982) 149 CLR 600
Coal Cliff Collieries Pty Limited v Sijehama Pty Limited (1991) 24 NSWLR 1
Collings Homes v Head & Ors [2002] NSWSC 1219
Masters v Cameron (1954) 91 CLR 353 at 360
Perri v Coolangatta Investments Pty Limited (1982) 149 CLR 537
Randwick City Council v Nancor Trading Co Pty Limited [2002] NSWCA 108
Woolfe v Alexander Sussman t/as Sussman Construction Consulting Services & Anor [2001] NSWSC 702

PARTIES :
Provincial Homes Pty Limited (A)
Anthony Doyle (R1)
Stephanie Doyle (R2)
Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal (R3)

FILE NUMBER(S): SC 30038/03

COUNSEL: Mr I Faulkner SC (respondents)

SOLICITORS: Dr D Doyle (Applicant)

- 29 -

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COMMON LAW DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LIST

WOOD CJ at CL

Thursday 15 July 2004

30038/03 Provincial Homes Pty Limited v Anthony Doyle, Stephanie Doyle, Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal

JUDGMENT

1 HIS HONOUR: These proceedings have been brought by Provincial Homes Pty Limited (“Provincial”) in the Administrative Law List. They involve an appeal from the decision of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal (“the Tribunal”), which ordered Provincial to pay to the present respondents (“the Doyles”), the sum of $31,003.90 plus costs. The appeal is brought under s 67(1) of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001, which permits an appeal to be made to this Court on a question which was decided by the Tribunal with respect to a matter of law. By reason of s 67(8) of the Act, a matter of law includes a matter relating to the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.

The Proceedings Before the Tribunal

2 The reasons of the Tribunal, delivered on 25 March 2003 record the following background to the dispute between the parties:

“5. It is common ground that around 27 June 1999, the applicants and the respondent entered into negotiations and that in August 1999, the applicants accepted the respondent’s ‘Acceptance of Tender’ document headed ‘Re Construction of Dwelling of Lot 114, No. 43 Bereen (sic) Street, Strathfield’ which the respondent issued with…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Provincial Homes v Doyle

Details

AGLC: Provincial Homes v Doyle [2004] NSWSC 624
Case: [2004] NSWSC 624
Decision Date: 15 July 2004

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Provincial Homes v Doyle involved an appeal against a decision made by the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. The central dispute was about the Tribunal's jurisdiction to hear an application concerning a claim related to building services. The case was ultimately heard by the court of appeal in Australia.

The key legal issues before the court were whether the Tribunal had the authority to hear the building services claim and if the claim could be categorised under section 89B of the Home Building Act 1989. The court also needed to determine the meaning of "building services" within section 84 of the Act and whether there had been a breach of contract.

The court examined the relevant sections of the Home Building Act 1989 and found that the Tribunal did have the jurisdiction to hear the building services claim. The court held that the claim could be categorised under section 89B, as it involved a dispute between a homeowner and a builder regarding the quality of work performed. The court also interpreted the term "building services" to include a range of services, such as plumbing, electrical, and gas fitting. The court found that there had been a breach of contract by the builder, as the work performed did not meet the required standards. As a result, the appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the Tribunal was upheld.

As a consequence of the court's decision, the original order of the Tribunal remained in place, which required the builder to remedy the defects and compensate the homeowner for the inconvenience and loss suffered.

Orders