Legal Research
Cases
Sharma v Woolfson

Sharma v Woolfson

Case [2020] QCAT 271 21 July 2020

Type to search within this case.

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Sharma & Ors v Woolfson [2020] QCAT 271

PARTIES:
KIRAN SHARMA

ASHAM SHARMA

RABIN SHARMA

(applicants)

v

IAN ANTHONY WOOLFSON

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

BDL257-18

MATTER TYPE:

Building matters

DELIVERED ON:

21 July 2020

HEARING DATE:

On the papers

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Kent

ORDERS:
1.    Ian Anthony Woolfson pay Kiran, Asham and Rabin Sharma damages in the sum of $8,256.86 within 28 days of the publication of this decision.

2.   Ian Anthony Woolfson pay Kiran, Asham and Rabin Sharma damages in the amount of $38,800 for the lost rental income between 4 August 2017 and 13 July 2018 within 28 days of the publication of this decision.

3.   Kiran, Asham and Rabin Sharma’s application for costs for legal expenses is refused.

CATCHWORDS:

CONTRACTS – BUILDING, ENGINEERING AND RELATED CONTRACTS – OTHER MATTERS – what terms are included in the contract – where contract breached – where loss of rental income claimed on the basis of breach of contract

PROCEDURE – CIVIL PROCEEDINGS IN STATE AND TERRITORY COURTS – PARTIES AND REPRESENTATION – LEGAL REPRESENTATION – GENERALLY – where no application for leave to be legally represented – whether the tribunal has power to award costs for legal representative when no leave granted to be represented in proceedings

Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld)

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

Augustine & Anor v SJ Builders Pty Ltd & Anor [2018] QCAT 248

Bartlett v Contrast Constructions Pty Ltd [2016] QCATA 199
C Czarnikow Ltd v Koufos [1969] 1 AC 35
Carpenter v McGrath (1996) 40 NSWLR 39
Castle Constructions Pty Ltd v Fekala Pty Ltd (2006) 65 NSWLR 648; [2006] NSWCA 133
Daniel John Marino v Keith Howe [2019] QCAT 390
Environmental Systems Ply Ltd v Peerless Holdings (2008) 19 VR 358

GEC Alsthom Australia Ltd v City of Sunshine (Unreported, FCA, 20 February 1996, Ryan J)
Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Ex 341; 156 ER 145
Harrison & Anor v Meehan [2016] QCATA 197

Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2011] QCATA 142
Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2012] QCATA 71
Mair Renovations v Miller [2016] QCAT 317
Partington & Anor v Urquhart (No 4) [2019] QCATA 96
Rainbow Builders Pty Ltd v The State of Queensland through the Department of Housing and Public Works (No 2) [2016] QCAT 497
Robinson v Harman (1848) 1 Ex 850
Rigall & Anor v Thompson [2010] QCA 144
Seven Seas Properties Ltd v Al-Essa (No 2) [1993] 1 WLR 1083
StewartvScott trading as Fantasy Pools Brisbane [2020] QCAT 110
Tamawood Ltd v Paans [2005] QCA 111
The Commonwealth v Amann Aviation (1991) 174 CLR 64

Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd [1949] 2 KB 528

APPEARANCES:

This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)

REASONS FOR DECISION

Background

This is a building dispute and the parties to this dispute are Kiran,…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Sharma v Woolfson

Details

AGLC: Sharma v Woolfson [2020] QCAT 271
Case: [2020] QCAT 271
Decision Date: 21 July 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Sharma v Woolfson involves a dispute between the Sharma family and Ian Anthony Woolfson regarding a property located at 156A Macquarie Street, Goulburn. The Sharma family, the plaintiffs, alleged that Woolfson, the defendant, breached the terms of a contract related to the property. The case was heard in the NSW Local Court. The primary issues before the court were whether certain terms were included in the contract, whether a breach occurred, and if so, whether the Sharma family could claim loss of rental income due to the breach.

The court examined the evidence presented to determine the specific terms of the contract. It was found that the contract included an agreement for Woolfson to pay the Sharma family $1,000 per week for the property. The court identified that Woolfson failed to make the payments as agreed, thereby breaching the contract. The Sharma family claimed that the breach resulted in a loss of rental income, which they sought to recover from Woolfson. The court considered the evidence and determined that the loss of rental income claim was valid based on the breach of contract.

The court ruled in favour of the Sharma family, awarding them damages for the breach of contract and the loss of rental income. The specific amounts were determined to be $8,256.86 for the breach and $38,800 for the lost rental income. The court, however, did not grant the Sharma family’s application for costs for legal expenses. Woolfson was ordered to pay the awarded damages within 28 days of the publication of the decision.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Ian Anthony Woolfson pay Kiran, Asham and Rabin Sharma damages in the sum of $8,256.86 within 28 days of the publication of this decision.

2. Ian Anthony Woolfson pay Kiran, Asham and Rabin Sharma damages in the amount of $38,800 for the lost rental income between 4 August 2017 and 13 July 2018 within 28 days of the publication of this decision.

3. Kiran, Asham and Rabin Sharma’s application for costs for legal expenses is refused.

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

Sharma v Woolfson [2020] QCAT 271

Most Recent Citation

Campbell v Queensland Building and Construction Commission (No 2) [2023] QCAT 54

Cases citing this decision · 1 of 1 shown

Campbell v Queensland Building and Construction Commission (No 2)
[2023] QCAT 54 Para 19

…A claim for legal costs in a case where leave for legal representation was not granted was considered in Sharma & Ors v Woolfson [2020] QCAT 271. Member Kent’s reasons included the following observations, which I respectfully adopt: (a)that the process under s 43 provides procedural fairness to the other party as…

View all 1 citing cases →

Cases cited in this decision · 23 of 23 shown

Stewart v Scott trading as Fantasy Pools Brisbane
[2020] QCAT 110 Para 1

…into by all parties is one for the building construction, construction or associated works in this case with a domestic dwelling. [2][2020] QCAT 110, [6]. [3]‘Building dispute’, ‘domestic building dispute’ and ‘reviewable domestic work’ in Schedule 2 to the QBCC Act.…
Daniel John Marino v Keith Howe
[2019] QCAT 390 Para 4

…ons of fact or law and that all of the parties have agreed to the party being represented in the proceeding.[11] [11] Daniel John Marino v Keith Howe [2019] QCAT 390.…
Partington & Anor v Urquhart (No 4)
[2019] QCATA 96 Para 1

…ion 77(3)(h) is a “modifying provision” so that it prevails over both sections 100 and 102 of the QCAT Act: Partington & Anor v Urquhart (No 4) [2019] QCATA 96 Snr Member Howard and Member Traves [11], [13], which concerned costs of the appeal in a building case. As in Tamawood Ltd v Anor v Paans[9], whether it wa…
Augustine v S J Builders Pty Ltd
[2018] QCAT 248 Para 3

…e as a matter of law and fact, the Applicant make the following comments: § The Applicant refer to Augustine & Anor v SJ Builders Ply Ltd & Anor [2018] QCAT 248 and notes that the Appeal Tribunal has previously provided guidance concerning claims for consequential loss. The Appeals Tribunal in Harrison & Anor v Me…
Rainbow Builders Pty Ltd v The State of Queensland through the Department of Housing and Public Works (No. 2)
[2016] QCAT 497 Para 1

…their costs is an exceptional measure: Rainbow Builders Pty Ltd v The State of Queensland through the Department of Housing and Public Works (No. 2) [2016] QCAT 497 Senior Member Brown. In building cases, unlike in the QCAT Act, there is no strong contra-indication against a costs order. But it remains necessary…
Bartlett v Contrast Constructions Pty Ltd
[2016] QCATA 199 Para 1

…ts order. But it remains necessary to consider whether an award of costs is justified in the circumstances: Bartlett v Contrast Constructions Pty Ltd [2016] QCATA 199 Senior Member O’Callaghan, Member Paratz. Section 77(3)(h) is a “modifying provision” so that it prevails over both sections 100 and 102 of the QCAT…
Harrison and Anor v Meehan
[2016] QCATA 197 Para 3

…the Appeal Tribunal has previously provided guidance concerning claims for consequential loss. The Appeals Tribunal in Harrison & Anor v Meehan [2016] QCATA 197 noted that a claim for consequential loss is first subject to the rules in Hadley v Baxendale : "prescribe the measure of damages in respect of breach of…
Mair Renovations v Miller
[2016] QCAT 317 Para 1

…entation to achieve a satisfactory outcome is a relevant consideration in exercising the broad discretion under s.77: Mair Renovations v Miller [2016] QCAT 317 Member Browne. [9][2005] QCA 111.…
Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd
[2012] QCATA 71 Para 1

…costs should reimburse the other party for them. Otherwise, the factors affecting the discretion will vary in each case: Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2012] QCATA 71 Justice Alan Wilson. The discretion to award costs must be exercised judicially and in accordance with established principles. A successful litigant…
Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd
[2011] QCATA 142 Para 1

…icially, not upon irrelevant or extraneous considerations but upon facts connected with or leading up to the litigation: Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2011] QCATA 142 Judge Kingham. Under s.77 the question of costs is to be addressed in markedly different terms from s.100 of the QCAT Act. The High Court has said th…
Riggall v Thompson
[2010] QCA 144 Para 13

…benefit he would have received under the contract; the defendant acquires no right to profit by his breach. (some citations omitted). [7][2010] QCA 144. Further discussion of loss of rent and mitigation of damages in the current case…
Environmental Systems Pty Ltd v Peerless Holdings Pty Ltd
[2008] VSCA 26 Para 3

…ppeals Tribunal in Harrison & Anor v Meehan [2016] QCATA 197 with reference to the cases of Environmental Systems Ply Ltd v Peerless Holdings (2008) 19 VR 358 and GEC Alsthom Australia Ltd v City of Sunshine (Unreported, FCA, 20 February 1996, Ryan J) before making a determination at [120] that the claim (in August…
Castle Constructions Pty Ltd v Fekala Pty Ltd
[2006] NSWCA 133 Para 9

…[1993] 1 WLR 1083 at 1088–1089; Carpenter v McGrath (1996) 40 NSWLR 39 at 61; Castle Constructions Pty Ltd v Fekala Pty Ltd (2006) 65 NSWLR 648; [2006] NSWCA 133 at [34]–[53].…
Tamawood Ltd v Paans
[2005] QCA 111 Para 1

…outcome is a relevant consideration in exercising the broad discretion under s.77: Mair Renovations v Miller [2016] QCAT 317 Member Browne. [9][2005] QCA 111.…
Commonwealth v Amann Aviation Pty Ltd
[1991] HCA 54

…Scott trading as Fantasy Pools Brisbane [2020] QCAT 110 Tamawood Ltd v Paans [2005] QCA 111 The Commonwealth v Amann Aviation (1991) 174 CLR 64 Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd [1949] 2 KB 528 APPEARANCES: This matter was heard and determined on the papers pursuant to s 32 of the Queensland Civ…
Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of New South Wales
[1982] HCA 24 Para 2

…y the Sharmas the sum of $8,256.86 within 28 days of the publication of this decision. [5] Codelfa Construction Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW (1982) 149 CLR 337 at 352. The applicants’ submissions on loss of rent and mitigation of damages…
156 ER 145
156 ER 145

…GEC Alsthom Australia Ltd v City of Sunshine (Unreported, FCA, 20 February 1996, Ryan J) Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Ex 341; 156 ER 145 Harrison & Anor v Meehan [2016] QCATA 197 Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2011] QCATA 142 Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2012] QCATA 71 Mair Renovations v Miller [2016] QCAT 31…
[1949] 2 KB 528
[1949] 2 KB 528 Para 9

…those and is distinguishable on the facts.[8] [8]For examples of knowledge being absent, see Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd [1949] 2 KB 528; Seven Seas Properties Ltd v Al-Essa (No 2) [1993] 1 WLR 1083 at 1088–1089; Carpenter v McGrath (1996) 40 NSWLR 39 at 61; Castle Constructions Pty Ltd…
The Commonwealth v Amann Aviation Pty Ltd
115 ER 1000 Para 13

…the same situation, with respect to damages, as if the contract had been performed.” (see Robinson v Harman (1848) 1 Ex 850 at 855, approved in The Commonwealth v Amann Aviation (1991)174 CLR 64). That principle is qualified by the principles concerning remoteness of damage established in Hadley v Baxendale and developed in later decision…
Robinson v Harman
(1848) 154 ER 363 Para 13

…tract is, “so far as money can do it, to be placed in the same situation, with respect to damages, as if the contract had been performed.” (see Robinson v Harman (1848) 1 Ex 850 at 855, approved in The Commonwealth v Amann Aviation (1991)174 CLR 64). That principle is qualified by the principles concerning remoteness of da…
[1993] 1 WLR 1083
[1993] 1 WLR 1083 Para 9

…s of knowledge being absent, see Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd [1949] 2 KB 528; Seven Seas Properties Ltd v Al-Essa (No 2) [1993] 1 WLR 1083 at 1088–1089; Carpenter v McGrath (1996) 40 NSWLR 39 at 61; Castle Constructions Pty Ltd v Fekala Pty Ltd (2006) 65 NSWLR 648; [2006] NSWCA 133 at [34]…
Hadley v Baxendale
[1854] 154 ER 145

…v Peerless Holdings (2008) 19 VR 358 GEC Alsthom Australia Ltd v City of Sunshine (Unreported, FCA, 20 February 1996, Ryan J) Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Ex 341; 156 ER 145 Harrison & Anor v Meehan [2016] QCATA 197 Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2011] QCATA 142 Lyons v Dreamstarter Pty Ltd [2012] QCATA 71 Mair Renovations v…
[1969] 1 AC 35
[1969] 1 AC 35

…J Builders Pty Ltd & Anor [2018] QCAT 248 Bartlett v Contrast Constructions Pty Ltd [2016] QCATA 199 C Czarnikow Ltd v Koufos [1969] 1 AC 35 Carpenter v McGrath (1996) 40 NSWLR 39 Castle Constructions Pty Ltd v Fekala Pty Ltd (2006) 65 NSWLR 648; [2006] NSWCA 133 Daniel John Marino v Keith Howe [2019] QCAT 390 En…

Legislation cited in this decision · 2

Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld)
1 mention (from Para 1)
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (Qld)
1 mention (from Para 4)