Temujain Movva v Hallmark Homes Pty Ltd

QUEENSLAND CIVIL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

CITATION:

Temujain Movva v Hallmark Homes Pty Ltd [2025] QCATA 81

PARTIES:

TEMUJAIN MOVVA

(applicant/appellant)

v

HALLMARK HOMES PTY LTD

(respondent)

APPLICATION NO/S:

APL330-23

ORIGINATING APPLICATION NO/S:

BDL005-21

MATTER TYPE:

Appeals

DELIVERED ON:

23 September 2025

HEARING DATE:

20 August 2025

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Senior Member Brown

ORDERS:

1.     Leave to appeal is refused.

2.     The appeal is dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – APPEAL - GENERAL PRINCIPLES – RIGHT OF APPEAL – WHEN APPEAL LIES – ERROR OF LAW – where respondent constructed a new home for the appellant including a concrete driveway and footpaths – where appellant alleged defective building work – where appellant appealed on basis that tribunal erred in construing contract, in making findings of fact, and in failing to afford the appellant procedural fairness – where contract provided that notes, headings, and side notes did not form part of contract – whether ‘note’ in building schedule confined to acknowledging the contents of a clause was a ‘general note’ or a ‘side note’– where it was open to the decision-maker to find the concrete aggregate supplied was compliant with contract specifications – where the tribunal preferred evidence of one expert over others – where appellant did not call experts to give evidence including about particular reference documents – where concrete aggregate compliant with Australian Standards – where tribunal considered all evidence

Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act2009 (Qld), s 142, s 146, s 147

Cachia v Grech [2009] NSWCA 232
Ericson v Queensland Building Services Authority [2013] QCA 391
Glenwood Properties Pty Ltd v Delmoss Pty Ltd [1986] 2 Qd R 388
McIver Bulk Liquid Haulage Pty Ltd v Fruehauf Australia Pty Ltd [1989] 2 Qd R 577

QUYD Pty Ltd v Marvass Pty Ltd [2009] 1 Qd R 41

APPEARANCES & REPRESENTATION:
Applicant:	Self-represented
Respondent:	Self-represented

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. This is an appeal from a decision of the Tribunal about a building dispute.

2. Hallmark built a home for Mr Movva. The building work included an exposed aggregate concrete driveway and pathways. Mr Movva said that the concreting work undertaken by Hallmark is defective and does not conform with the building contract. Mr Movva says that the exposed concrete aggregate cannot be walked upon with bare feet as the aggregate particles are too sharp and exposed.

3. Mr Movva commenced a proceeding in the Tribunal claiming damages for breach of contract. The Tribunal dismissed Mr Movva’s application. Mr Movva appeals the decision.

The grounds of appeal and the statutory framework relevant to appeals

1. The grounds of appeal are expressed very broadly in the application for leave to appeal or appeal. The grounds are expanded upon considerably in Mr Movva’s appeal submissions. The grounds of appeal were further clarified at the appeal hearing and may be grouped as follows:

   (a)Error by the learned member in construing the contract;

   (b)Error by the learned member in making findings of fact;

   (c)Error by the learned member in failing to afford Mr Movva…