S&J Harris Building Services Pty Ltd v Jacques
Case
•
[2022] NSWCATCD 95
•01 June 2022
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
S&J Harris Building Services Pty Ltd v Jacques [2022] NSWCATCD 95
[2022] NSWCATCD 95
01 June 2022
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the matter of S&J Harris Building Services Pty Ltd v Jacques, the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) was tasked with resolving a dispute between the plaintiff, a building services company, and the defendant, Theresa Jacques, concerning a costs plus contract. The primary issue was the omission of work by the builder, S&J Harris Building Services Pty Ltd, and the amount to be paid by the defendant as a result. The defendant had engaged the builder to undertake construction work on her property, and disputes arose regarding the completion of the work and the related payments.
The legal issues the tribunal addressed included whether the builder had omitted work, the extent of the omissions, and the appropriate quantum of payment to the builder. The tribunal had to interpret the terms of the contract and determine the fair value of the work actually performed. This involved assessing the builder's invoices, the work specified in the contract, and the work that had not been completed.
The tribunal found that the builder had omitted certain work as specified in the contract, and the defendant was liable for the cost of that omitted work. The tribunal calculated the amount owed to the builder based on the contract terms and the reasonable value of the omitted work. Consequently, the tribunal ordered the defendant to pay the builder a specified sum immediately and mandated the completion of the omitted work within a defined period. Additionally, the tribunal provided a procedure for any future costs applications and allowed the defendant the option to renew the proceedings if the builder failed to comply with the ordered work.
In summary, the tribunal determined that the defendant owed the builder a specific sum for the omitted work and directed the completion of the outstanding work. The orders included immediate payment, a timeframe for completing the omitted work, and a framework for handling any future costs applications.
The legal issues the tribunal addressed included whether the builder had omitted work, the extent of the omissions, and the appropriate quantum of payment to the builder. The tribunal had to interpret the terms of the contract and determine the fair value of the work actually performed. This involved assessing the builder's invoices, the work specified in the contract, and the work that had not been completed.
The tribunal found that the builder had omitted certain work as specified in the contract, and the defendant was liable for the cost of that omitted work. The tribunal calculated the amount owed to the builder based on the contract terms and the reasonable value of the omitted work. Consequently, the tribunal ordered the defendant to pay the builder a specified sum immediately and mandated the completion of the omitted work within a defined period. Additionally, the tribunal provided a procedure for any future costs applications and allowed the defendant the option to renew the proceedings if the builder failed to comply with the ordered work.
In summary, the tribunal determined that the defendant owed the builder a specific sum for the omitted work and directed the completion of the outstanding work. The orders included immediate payment, a timeframe for completing the omitted work, and a framework for handling any future costs applications.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Building & Construction Law
-
Civil Litigation & Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Breach of Contract
-
Compensatory Damages
-
Limitation Periods
-
Costs
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Cases Citing This Decision
0
Cases Cited
3
Statutory Material Cited
1
Blacktown City Council v Hocking
[2008] NSWCA 144
Mount Bruce Mining Pty Ltd v Wright Prospecting Pty Ltd
[2015] HCA 37
Mount Bruce Mining Pty Ltd v Wright Prospecting Pty Ltd
[2015] HCA 37