Wright v Foresight Constructions Pty Ltd

The case of *Wright v Foresight Constructions Pty Ltd* concerned a dispute arising from a building contract. The primary issue before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales was whether an oral variation to a written building contract, which was otherwise unenforceable by the builder under the *Home Building Act 1989* (NSW), could be relied upon by the builder in defence of a claim brought by the owner.

The court was required to determine the legal effect of an oral variation to a building contract that did not comply with the formal requirements of the *Home Building Act 1989* (NSW). Specifically, the court considered whether the builder could rely on such an oral variation to defeat the owner's claim, despite the statute's provisions regarding the enforceability of building contracts. The court also addressed a separate issue concerning a variation of a costs order made in the Tribunal.

The court reasoned that the *Home Building Act 1989* (NSW) prescribed consequences for non-compliance with its requirements, including the unenforceability of the contract by the builder. However, the court found that the builder could not rely on the oral variation to defeat the owner's claim, as the statute's purpose was to protect consumers, and allowing such a defence would undermine that protection. The court also set aside a costs order that had wrongly subjected one of the parties to the builder's costs in the Tribunal.

The Court of Appeal ordered that the District Court's costs order in the Tribunal be set aside to the extent it required Desiree Wright to pay any part of the builder's costs. The application to review the District Court's judgment was otherwise dismissed, and Adam Wright was ordered to pay the respondent's costs in the Court of Appeal.