Reeves v Lakes Environmental Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND INVERCARGILL REGISTRY

CIV-2013-425-000117 [2014] NZHC 2760

BETWEEN

TREVOR AND MARIA REEVES

Plaintiffs

AND

LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL LIMITED Defendant

Hearing:	13, 14, 15 May, 30 June and 1 July 2014
Appearances:	B C Nevell for the Plaintiffs M E Parker and A J Nash for the Defendant
Judgment:	6 November 2014

RESERVED JUDGMENT OF DUNNINGHAM J

Contents

Introduction ..........................................................................................................[1] Procedural Issues .................................................................................................[4] Application for leave to admit further evidence by affidavit  [4] Further submissions on diary entries  [11] Background.........................................................................................................[19] Was Lakes Environmental negligent? ..............................................................[47] Was the inspection done at all?  [47] Was the inspection negligent?  [53] Was Lakes Environmental’s negligence causative of the plaintiffs’ loss?  [67]

Is the plaintiffs’ claim time-barred under s 4 of the Limitation Act 1950?...[72] When did the plaintiffs discover their cause of action?   [78] Was the claim reasonably discoverable at an earlier date?   [83] Conclusion        [91] Were the plaintiffs contributorily negligent? ..................................................[95] Did the plaintiffs fail to mitigate their loss?................................................... [111] Failure to pursue the builder  [117]

Failure to remedy the defects and/or protect the building against the effects of

the elements and the effluxion of time  [123] Failure to obtain appropriate professional advice  [129] Failure to obtain legal advice in a timely manner  [133] Increased costs through delay  [137]

REEVES v LAKES ENVIRONMENTAL LIMITED [2014] NZHC 2760 [6 November 2014]

What is the quantum of the plaintiffs’ claim? ...............................................[140] Demolition and rebuild costs  [146] Wasted expenditure costs  [150] Consultants’ fees  [153] Architect’s and Council Fees  [156] Repairs to existing house  [160] General damages  [162] Outcome ............................................................................................................[167]

Introduction

[1]      This is a claim by Mr and Mrs Reeves, for damages they say they have suffered as a result of a negligent pre-pour inspection by the Queenstown Lakes District   Council’s   regulatory   services   company,   Civic   Corporation   Limited (Civic Corp), before the foundation slab was laid for their new home at Wanaka.

[2]     The  defendant,  now  called  Lakes  Environmental  Limited  (Lakes Environmental), admits it owed the Reeves a duty of care when carrying out the pre- pour inspection.  It does not admit the inspection was carried out negligently.  More importantly, Lakes Environmental raises three affirmative defences.  It says:

(a)       the  cause  of  action  is  statute  barred,  as  the  claim  was  filed  on

27 March 2013, when the allegedly negligent inspection took place on

8 February 2007;

(b)      the Reeves were contributorily negligent; and

(c)       the Reeves failed to take reasonable steps to mitigate their loss.

[3]      Mr and Mrs Reeves’ builder, Mr Andy Brown, acknowledged he had not laid the foundations in accordance with the consented plans, but he took no steps to rectify the situation.   Regrettably, he then died in February 2012.   Lakes Environmental is, therefore, the sole defendant in respect of the Reeves’ claim for losses totalling $305,651.74 including GST, plus general damages of $70,000.

Procedural Issues

Application for leave to admit further evidence by affidavit

[4]      A  procedural  issue  arose  in  the  course  of  the  hearing  where,  during cross-examination of Mr Laurenson, Mr Laurenson suggested that Mr…