Zhang & Lin v Lane - [2017] QCAT 366

CITATION:

Zhang & Lin v Lane [2017] QCAT 366

PARTIES:	Xian Ling Zhang Sen Lin (Applicants)
v
David Campbell Lane (Respondent)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

BDL261-16

MATTER TYPE:

Building Matters

HEARING DATE:

13 September 2017

HEARD AT:

Brisbane

DECISION OF:

Member Hughes

DELIVERED ON:

13 September 2017

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:

1. David Campbell Lane pay to Xian Ling Zhang and Sen Lin the sum of $135,400.00 by 20 October 2017; and

2. David Campbell Lane pay to Xian Ling Zhang and Sen Lin costs of $315.70 by 20 October 2017.

CATCHWORDS:	CONTRACTS – BUILDING, ENGINEERING AND RELATED CONTRACTS – PERFORMANCE OF WORK – REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT – DAMAGES – MEASURE OF – where builder performed unlicensed building work – where builder did not complete works – where defective work – where home owner entitled to recover money paid under Agreement plus damages to rectify and complete Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld), s 42, s 77, Schedule 1B, Schedule 2 A L Builders Pty Ltd v. Fatseas (No. 2) [2014] QCATA 319 Bellgrove v Eldridge (1954) 90 CLR 613 Cook’s Construction Pty Ltd v Stork Food Systems Australasia Pty Ltd [2009] QCA 075 Faulks v. New World Constructions Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2014] QCAT 329 Marshall v Marshall [1991] 1 Qd R 173 Robinson v Harman [1848] EngR 135 Yongwoo Park v Betaland Pty Ltd [2017] QCAT 228
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
APPLICANT:	Sen Lin appeared in person and on behalf of Xian Ling Zhang
RESPONDENT:	David Campbell Lane did not appear

REASONS FOR DECISION

What is this Application about?

Xian Ling Zhang and Sen Lin paid $76,000.00 to David Lane for building works. Mr Lane was not licensed. He did not complete the works.
Mr Lane did not file a response to the claim or engage with the Tribunal process. Ms Zhang and Mr Lin are therefore entitled to a final decision in the proceeding, with damages to be assessed.[1]
[1] Direction 2 dated 19 July 2017.
The Tribunal must now assess their damages.

On what basis does the Tribunal assess damages?

Ms Zhang and Mr Lin signed a written Agreement with Mr Lane on
[2]Queensland Building and Construction Commission Act 1991 (Qld), Schedule 1B, s 13, s 14.
[3] Yongwoo Park v Betaland Pty Ltd [2017] QCAT 228, [5] - [22].
7 August 2016. Although the Agreement was performed by an unlicensed builder and did not include formal statutory requirements of the builder’s licence number and a notice that the building owner has the right to withdraw,[2] this does not make it illegal, void or unenforceable by the home owner.[3]
The Agreement was that Mr Lane would perform the following work:
a)Both sides retaining wall. Paint off fence;
b)Front brick wall with lights and aluminium fence;
c)Electric gate, side gate and mail box on front fence;
d)Pave footpath to the side gate;
e)The deck, paint off deck;
f)The turf area around the house;
g)Garden around council sewage;
h)Building off…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Zhang & Lin v Lane 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

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2017] QCAT 366
Decision Date: 13 September 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Zhang and Lin v Lane involved a dispute between the plaintiffs, Xian Ling Zhang and Sen Lin, and the defendant, David Campbell Lane, over the performance of building work. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendant, who was contracted to carry out construction work on their property, failed to complete the work to the required standard and did so without the necessary licenses. The matter was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The central legal issues in this case revolved around the defendant's failure to complete the work as agreed, the quality of the work that was completed, and the proper measure of damages for breach of contract. The plaintiffs argued that they were entitled to recover the money paid to the defendant under the agreement, as well as damages to rectify and complete the work. The defendant, on the other hand, contended that the plaintiffs had not provided sufficient evidence to support their claims for damages.

The tribunal found that the defendant had indeed failed to complete the work to the required standard and had carried out unlicensed work. The tribunal also accepted the plaintiffs' evidence regarding the amount of money paid to the defendant and the cost of rectifying and completing the work. As a result, the tribunal held that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover the money paid to the defendant, as well as additional damages to rectify and complete the work. The tribunal further ordered that the defendant pay the plaintiffs costs of the proceedings. This case highlights the importance of ensuring that building work is carried out to the required standard and by licensed professionals. It also underscores the need for clear and detailed contractual agreements that set out the obligations of each party.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. David Campbell Lane pay to Xian Ling Zhang and Sen Lin the sum of $135,400.00 by 20 October 2017; and

2. David Campbell Lane pay to Xian Ling Zhang and Sen Lin costs of $315.70 by 20 October 2017.

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.