DISTRICT COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
Williams v Stone Homes P/L & Anor [2014] QDC 64
PARTIES:
VICKIE WILLIAMS and MARK WILLIAMS
(plaintiffs)v
STONE HOMES PTY LTD (ACN 115 467 439)
(defendant)and
ACAME PTY LTD (ABN 28 002 465 072)
(third party)FILE NO:
676/12
DIVISION:
Civil
PROCEEDING:
Claims (by the plaintiffs, the defendant and the third party)
ORIGINATING COURT:
District Court
DELIVERED ON:
1 April 2014
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
10 and 11 March 2014
JUDGE:
Dorney QC DCJ
JUDGMENT AND ORDERS:
1. The judgment of the Court is that the defendant pay to the plaintiffs Vickie Williams and Mark Williams, jointly, the amount of $72,892.02, including $19,234.96 interest to this day, and $5,000.00 to Vickie Williams and $2,500.00 to Mark Williams, severally.
2. The defendant pay the plaintiffs’ costs of the proceeding to be assessed on the standard basis.
3. The judgment of the Court is that the third party pay to the defendant the amount of $60,294.02.
4. The defendant and the third party file, and serve, submissions on what other orders, including orders as to costs, should be made in accordance with the Reasons given, by 4pm 8 April 2014.
CATCHWORDS:
Building contracts – enforceability – whether illegal as performed because licence necessary – whether recoverability where contractual breach in issue, rather than remuneration – whether extra-territorial effect for non-licensing offence – whether proportionate liability effectively raised
LEGISLATION CITED:
CASES CITED:COUNSEL:
Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999, r 166(1), r 202, r 203, r 204, r 225, r 697(2)
Acts Interpretation Act 1954, s 14A, s 35
Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW)
Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld), s 28, s 28(1)(a), s 29, s 30, s 31, s 32, s 32(4), s 32(5), s 32A, s 32B
Civil Proceedings Act 2011, s 58, s 58(3)
Criminal Code Act 1899, s 12(3)
Home Building Act 1989 (NSW)
Law Reform Act 1995, s 6(c), s 7
Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991, s 103
Queensland Building Services Authority Act 1991 (Reprint 9), s 4, s 42, s 42(1), s 42(3), s 42(9), s 44E(a), s 44E(c), Sch 2
Queensland Building Services Authority Regulation 2003, s 5, Part 37
Australian Timber & Trusses P/L v T&M Buckley P/L [2012] QSC 110
Baltic Shipping Co v Dillon (1992-1993) 176 CLR 344
Barkworth v Sidhu [2011] 1 Qd R 419
Bellgrove v Eldridge (1954) 90 CLR 613
Burmic P/L v Goldview P/L [2003] 2 Qd R 477
Byers v Dorotea P/L (1986) 69 ALR 715
Chiropractic Board of Aust v Jamieson [2013] QSC 77
Coote v Richards [2001] 2 Qd R 20
Coshott v Fewings Joinery P/L [1996] NSWCA 122
Dart Holdings P/L v Total Concept Group P/L & Ors [2012] QSC 158
Falko v James McEwan & Co P/L [1977] VR 447
Gardiner v Agricultural and Rural Finance P/L [2007] NSWCA 235
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Williams v Stone Homes P/L & Anor and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2014] QDC 64
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to decide whether the contract was illegal as performed due to the absence of a licence. It was also necessary to determine if the recoverability of damages was affected by the nature of the breach, and whether the extra-territorial effect of a non-licensing offence could be considered. Additionally, the court needed to address the issue of whether the proportionate liability raised by Stone Homes P/L was valid.
The court held that the contract was not illegal as performed, as the absence of a licence did not render the contract unenforceable. The court found that the recoverability of damages was not affected by the nature of the breach. In relation to the extra-territorial effect of the non-licensing offence, the court found that it was not applicable in this case. Lastly, the court held that the proportionate liability raised by Stone Homes P/L was not valid, as it was not supported by the facts of the case.
The court ordered that Williams' claim for damages was to be determined in accordance with the terms of the contract, and that Stone Homes P/L was not liable for any additional costs arising from the non-licensing offence. The court also dismissed Stone Homes P/L's counter-claim for proportionate liability.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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.