Reed v Peridis

[2005] SASC 136

SUPREME COURT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA

(Magistrates Appeals: Civil)

REED & ORS v PERIDIS & ANOR

Judgment of The Honourable Justice Besanko

8 April 2005

CONTRACTS - BUILDING, ENGINEERING AND RELATED CONTRACTS

Appeal against order of a Magistrate that appellants pay respondents damages of $11,200 for breach of contract - where appellants conducted an earthmoving business - where appellants contracted to enlarge an existing dam on the respondents' rural property - where respondents claimed the dam seeped excessive amounts of water - whether Magistrate erred in finding that it was an implied term of the contract that the clay used to line the dam would be reasonably fit for its purpose - whether Magistrate erred in finding that it was an implied term of the contract that the work or services to be performed by the appellants would be performed in a proper manner and in accordance with accepted standards - whether Magistrate erred in treating published reference works as the best evidence of appropriate or acceptable practice rather than the common practice used in the Adelaide Hills area and used by the appellants - whether Magistrate erred in finding that the clay used by the appellants was inadequate and inappropriate - whether Magistrate erred in finding that the method of compaction undertaken by the appellants was inadequate - whether Magistrate erred in finding that there was excessive seepage from the dam - whether Magistrate erred in accepting the evidence of the respondents' expert over that of the appellants' expert - whether Magistrate erred in his assessment of damages in finding that rectification work costing $11,200 was necessary and reasonable - appeal dismissed.

Magistrates Court Act 1991 s 40; Supreme Court Rules 1987 r 97.17; Consumer Transactions Act 1972 s 7; Building Work Contractors Act 1995 s 32, referred to.
Bellgrove v Eldridge (1954) 90 CLR 613, applied.
BP Refinery (Westernport) Pty Ltd v Hastings Shire Council (1977) 180 CLR 266; Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority (NSW) (1982) 149 CLR 337; Chicco v City of Woodville (1989) 150 LSJS 89, considered.

REED & ORS v PERIDIS & ANOR
[2005] SASC 136

Magistrates Appeal

1. BESANKO J: This is an appeal from orders made by a Magistrate in a civil action in the Magistrates Court. The Magistrate made an order that the defendants to the action pay the plaintiffs the sum of $11,200. The defendants appeal to this Court against that order pursuant to s 40 of the Magistrates Court Act 1991.  The appeal is by way of rehearing (r 97.17 Supreme Court Rules 1987).

2. The defendants are Mr Christopher John Reed and Ms Julianne Pearl Reed, and at the relevant time they were trading in partnership as Reeds Excavations.  The business of the partnership was the carrying out of earthmoving works and included the construction of dams on rural properties.

3. The plaintiffs are Mr Peter Peridis and Mr Matthew Moores and they own a rural property at Cleggett Road, Little Hampton in the…