Roberts v Goodwin Street Developments Pty Ltd

Case [2023] NSWCA 5

Court of Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Roberts v Goodwin Street Developments Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCA 5
Hearing dates: 8 November 2022
Date of orders: 10 February 2023
Decision date: 10 February 2023
Before: Ward P at [1]; Kirk JA and Griffiths AJA at [80]
Decision:

Appeal dismissed with costs

Catchwords:

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — Contract — Defects — Duty of care — Whether statutory duty of care under the Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 (NSW) applies in relation to “boarding houses” — Meaning of “building work” — Meaning of “construction work”

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — Contract — Damages — Whether proper measure of damages to reversionary interest in property is the rectification of the damage or the diminution in value of the reversionary interest

CIVIL PROCEDURE — Commercial List, Technology and Construction List — Procedure — List Statements — Where respondent failed to plead action on the case in trespass in List Statement — Whether denial of procedural fairness to determine the matter on that basis

Legislation Cited:

American Restatement (First) of Torts

Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW)

Community Land Management Act 1989 (NSW)

Community Land Management Act 2021 (NSW)

Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW)

Corporations Act 2001 (Cth)

Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 (NSW)

Design and Building Practitioners Regulation 2021 (NSW)

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (NSW)

Home Building Act 1989 (NSW)

Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW)

Landlord and Tenant Act 1927 (UK)

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Abbahall Ltd v Smee [2003] 1 WLR 1472

Alcan (NT) Alumina Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Territory Revenue (2009) 239 CLR 27; [2009] HCA 41

Alston v Scales (1832) 9 Bing 3

Arthur Robinson (Grafton) Pty Ltd v Carter (1968) 122 CLR 649; [1968[ HCA 9

Banque Commerciale SA., en liquidation v Akhil Holdings Ltd (1990) 169 CLR 279; [1990] HCA 11

Baxter v Taylor (1832) 4 B & AD 71

BCEG International (Australia) Pty Ltd v Xiao [2022] NSWSC 972

Beaudesert Shire Council v Smith (1966) 120 CLR 145; [1966] HCA 49

Birtchnell v Fred Walker and Co Pty Ltd (1930) Argus LR 176

Bowen Investments Pty Ltd v Tabcorp Holdings Ltd (2008) 166 FCR 494; [2008] FCAFC 38

Brookfield Multiplex Ltd v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 61288 (2014) 254 CLR 185; [2014] HCA 36

Bryant v Quinn [2022] NSWCA 163

Capello v Hammond & Simonds NSW Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCA 57

Chulcough v Holley (1968) 41 ALJR 336

Coleman v Seaborne Pty Ltd [2007] NSWCA 60

Commissioner of Taxation v Consolidated Media Holdings Ltd (2012) 250 CLR 503; [2012] HCA 55

Cotterill v Hobby (1825) 107 ER 1133; (1825) 4 B&C 465

Dare v Pulham (1982) 148 CLR 658; [1982] HCA 70

Dodd Properties Ltd v Canterbury City Council [1980] 1 WLR 433

Ehlmer v Hall [1993] 1 EGLR 137

Evans v Balog [1976] 1 NSWLR 36

Farah Constructions Pty Ltd v Say-Dee Pty Ltd (2007) 230 CLR 89; [2007]…

Continue reading Roberts v Goodwin Street Developments Pty Ltd

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Roberts v Goodwin Street Developments Pty Ltd [2023] NSWCA 5
Case
[2023] NSWCA 5
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Roberts was the owner of a boarding house and Goodwin Street Developments Pty Ltd was the developer and builder of the property. Roberts alleged that the building work carried out by Goodwin Street was defective, leading to damage to the property. Roberts sought to recover damages for these defects. The dispute ultimately came before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the statutory duty of care imposed by the *Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020* (NSW) applied to the boarding house in question, and what was the proper measure of damages for a reversionary interest in property where damage had occurred. Additionally, the court considered whether the respondent had been denied procedural fairness by the trial judge determining the matter on the basis of an action on the case in trespass, which had not been explicitly pleaded in the List Statement.

The Court of Appeal held that the *Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020* (NSW) did apply to the boarding house, as it constituted a "building" and the work undertaken was "building work" and "construction work" within the meaning of the Act. Regarding damages, the court determined that for a reversionary interest, the proper measure was the diminution in the value of that interest, rather than the cost of rectification. The court also found no denial of procedural fairness, as the issue of trespass had been sufficiently foreshadowed and argued during the proceedings.

The appeal was dismissed, and Goodwin Street Developments Pty Ltd was awarded its costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Appeal dismissed with costs

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.