Sader v Renbar Constructions PL

Case [2025] NSWCATCD 47


Civil and Administrative Tribunal


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Sader v Renbar Constructions PL [2025] NSWCATCD 47
Hearing dates: 16 August 2024 with written submissions to 17 December 2024
Date of orders: 12 June 2025
Decision date: 12 June 2025
Jurisdiction:Consumer and Commercial Division
Before: G Burton SC, Senior Member
Decision:

1.   Application dismissed.

2.   Order as follows in respect of costs:

2.1     Any application in respect of costs with supporting evidence (beyond existing evidence) and written submissions to be filed and served on or before 24 June 2025.

2.2     Any evidence and written submissions in response to be filed and served on or before 8 July 2025.

Catchwords:

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION – HOME BUILDING – alleged breaches of statutory warranties – alleged breaches of duty of care – whether breaches of duty sufficiently particularised – whether breaches of warranty already litigated and owners precluded from further litigation – Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) ss 18B, 18C, 18E(2), 18F - Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 (NSW) s 37

Legislation Cited:

Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 (NSW)

Home Building Act 1989 (NSW)

Home Building Regulation 2014 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Baron Corporation PL v Owners SP 69567 [2013] NSWCA 238

Barwick v Shetab [2017] NSWCATAP 127

Bellgrove v Eldridge (1954) 90 CLR 613, [1954] HCA 36

BNT Constructions PL v Allen [2017] NSWCATAP 186

Brennan Constructions PL v Davison [2018] NSWCATAP 210

Brooks v Gannon Constructions PL [2017] NSWCATCD 12

Catapult Constructions PL v Denison [2018] NSWCATAP 158

Clements v Murphy [2018] NSWCATAP 152

Colourrender (Australia) PL v Sarkis [2023] NSWCATAP 250

Conquer v Boot [1928] 2 KB 336

Downer EDI Rail PL v John Holland PL [2018] NSWSC 326

DTR Nominees PL v Mona Homes PL (1978) 138 CLR 423

Galdona v Peacock [2017] NSWCATAP 64

GPM Constructions PL v Baker [2018] NSWCATAP 119

Honeywood v Munnings (2006) 67 NSWLR 466

Hyder Consulting (Australia) PL v Wilh Wilhelmsen Agency PL [2001] NSWCA 313

Karakominakis v Big Country Developments PL [2000] NSWCA 313

Kaye v Owners SP 4350 [2022] NSWSC 1386

Kumar v Sabharwal [2017] NSWCATAP 200

Kurmond Homes PL v Marsden [2018] NSWCATAP 23

Marr v JCK Building Solutions PL [2018] NCATCCD, unreported, 4 December 2018, HB 16/43946

Onerati v Phillips Constructions PL (1989) 16 NSWLR 730

Owners SP 66375 v King [2018] NSWCA 170

Owners SP 76674 v Di Blasio Constructions PL [2014] NSWSC 1067

Owners SP 78465 v MD Constructions PL [2016] NSWSC 162

Parkview Constructions PL v Owners SP 90018 [2023] NSWCA 66

Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun PL (1981) 147 CLR 589, [1981] HCA 45

Renbar Constructions PL v/ats Sader [2022] NSWSC 172

Shousha v Habuco Projects PL [2020] NSWCATCD, unreported, 14 April 2020

Steak Plains Olive Farm PL v Australian Executor Trustees Ltd [2015] NSWSC 289

Stevenson v Ashton [2019] NSWSC 1689; Ashton v Stevenson [2020] NSWCATAP 233

Tabcorp Holdings Ltd v Bowen Investments PL (2009) 236 CLR 272, [2009] HCA 8

TCN Channel 9 PL v…

Continue reading Sader v Renbar Constructions PL

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Sader v Renbar Constructions PL [2025] NSWCATCD 47
Case
[2025] NSWCATCD 47
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The plaintiffs, Mr and Mrs Sader, brought an action against Renbar Constructions PL, alleging breaches of statutory warranties and duty of care in relation to the construction of their home. The case was heard and determined in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The plaintiffs claimed that Renbar Constructions PL had failed to construct their home in accordance with the plans and specifications, and that there were defects in the construction that resulted in significant damage to their property.

The central legal issues the court had to address were whether the plaintiffs had sufficiently particularised their claims of breaches of statutory warranties and duty of care, and whether the plaintiffs were precluded from further litigation due to previous claims concerning the breaches of warranty. The court needed to determine if the claims met the necessary standards for particularisation and whether the plaintiffs were barred from pursuing the same issues again under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) and the Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 (NSW).

In its judgment, the court found that the plaintiffs had not sufficiently particularised their claims of breaches of statutory warranties and duty of care. The court held that the claims were vague and did not provide the necessary detail to allow the defendants to properly respond. Additionally, the court found that the plaintiffs were precluded from further litigation concerning the breaches of warranty, as these issues had already been the subject of previous litigation and resolved. Consequently, the application was dismissed. The court also made an order regarding costs, specifying the timeframes for any further applications and responses in relation to costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Application dismissed.

2. Order as follows in respect of costs:

2.1 Any application in respect of costs with supporting evidence (beyond existing evidence) and written submissions to be filed and served on or before 24 June 2025.

2.2 Any evidence and written submissions in response to be filed and served on or before 8 July 2025.

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.