Triguboff v Barry

The appeal before the court was between the appellant, Mr Triguboff, and the respondents, Barry, a body corporate managing a strata scheme. The dispute arose from an order made by an adjudicator regarding the repair of a leaking roofing membrane on a balcony. The original order required the appellant to pay 100% of the costs of the works, while the respondents were to bear no costs. The appellant challenged the order, arguing that it contained an error of law. The court was tasked with determining whether the appeal was valid and whether the adjudicator's order contained an error of law.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the appeal was properly before the court on a question of law. The appellant argued that the adjudicator had made an error of law by failing to consider that the respondents were required to bear a portion of the costs of the works under the regulations. The respondents contended that the adjudicator's decision was correct and that the appeal should be dismissed. The court had to determine the validity of the appeal and whether the adjudicator's decision contained an error of law.

The court held that the appeal was valid and that the adjudicator's decision contained an error of law. The court found that the adjudicator had failed to consider the relevant provisions of the regulations, which required the respondents to bear a portion of the costs of the works. The court set aside the original order and remitted the matter to the adjudicator for a fresh decision on the question of who should bear the costs of the works.

The court ordered that Order 6 of the original decision be set aside and that the matter be remitted to the adjudicator for a fresh decision on the question of who should bear the costs of the works the subject of Order 1 of the original decision.