Rowan v Betnale Pty Ltd

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Rowan v Betnale Pty Ltd [2020] QCAT 400

PARTIES:

PETER ROWAN

(applicant)

v

BETNALE PTY LTD T/A SUPERIOR GRANNY FLATS

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

BDL017-20

MATTER TYPE:

Building matters

DELIVERED ON:

20 October 2020

HEARING DATE:

6 October 2020

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Howe

ORDERS:

Betnale Pty Ltd T/A Superior Granny Flats pay to Peter Rowan the sum of $18,500 within 14 days of order.

CATCHWORDS:

CONTRACTS – BUILDING, ENGINEERING AND RELATED CONTRACTS – PERFORMANCE OF WORK – REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT – DAMAGES – MEASURE OF – where the respondent builder failed to complete building work on time – where various requirements set by the certifier remained outstanding after the time set for completion – where no final inspection certificate had issued at the time of institution of proceedings – where the commencement of proceedings constituted acceptance of repudiation of the contract by the builder and termination of the contract in exercise of common law rights – where liquidated damages were sought – whether the builder’s claim for provisional sums was evidenced – where both parties lacked evidence in support of monetary claims made

Building Regulation 2006 (Qld), s 24(3)(f)

Kennedy v Hill [1999] SASC 440

Perri v Coolangatta Investments Pty Ltd [1982] HCA 29; (1982) 149 CLR 537

Woods v Woods [2000] NSWSC 851

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	Self-represented
Respondent:	Self-represented by S Bray

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. Mr Rowan owned six separate house properties. He engaged the respondent (“Betnale”) to build self-contained units behind each principal dwelling already constructed on each property.

2. On 6 February 2018 he entered into separate but identical Master Builders written contracts in respect of the various properties save for technical drawings particular to each lot. The price for each build was the same, $104,750.

3. It is not clear when the construction work first started and at which property. Mr Rowan has complaints about four of them. However the most significant complaint concerns a property at Pamela Crescent (‘Pamela Crescent’).

4. With respect to Pamela Crescent, it appears construction started there on 27 September 2018. Betnale claims completion occurred on 16 December 2018, which is challenged by Mr Rowan. Mr Rowan points to the final inspection certificate only being issued on 1 May 2020.

5. Prior to 1 May 2020 Mr Rowan commenced proceedings in the Tribunal by way of domestic building dispute filed on 24 January 2020. In his claim he sought rectification of defective work at four properties to a value of $5,533.05, an award of damages of $150 and a claim for $18,250 liquidated damages in respect of Pamela Crescent.

6. Betnale has filed a response and counterclaim denying defective or incomplete work and denying Mr Rowan’s claim for liquidated damages. Betnale maintains it achieved practical completion in accordance with the contract. Betnale counterclaims $12,000 for the cost of additional foundation work inadvertently omitted from its progress claims to date, together with a claim for $1,600 for site cleaning at Pamela Crescent and $902 for…