Sharpe v Heywood

In *Sharpe v Heywood*, the District Court of New South Wales was asked to determine a dispute concerning the alleged breach of a building contract. The plaintiff, Mr. Sharpe, sought damages from the defendant, Mr. Heywood, for alleged defects in building work carried out at the plaintiff's property. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the work performed by the defendant met the contractual standards and whether certain alleged defects constituted a breach of that contract.

The primary legal issues before the court were: (1) whether the defendant had breached the building contract by failing to carry out the work with due care and skill and in a good and workmanlike manner, as required by the contract and implied terms; and (2) if a breach was established, what was the appropriate measure of damages to compensate the plaintiff for the loss suffered. The court was required to assess the evidence presented by both parties regarding the quality of the work and the extent of any alleged defects.

Judge Altobelli considered the expert evidence and the terms of the building contract. The court applied the principles of contract law, focusing on the implied term that building work would be carried out with reasonable care and skill and would be fit for its intended purpose. The court found that certain defects did indeed constitute a breach of contract. The measure of damages was determined by reference to the cost of rectifying the defective work to bring it into conformity with the contract.