NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Suecha Pty Ltd v VSD Glass & Timber Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCATAP 170 Hearing dates: 23 July 2020 Date of orders: 7 August 2020 Decision date: 07 August 2020 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: P Durack SC, Senior Member D Robertson, Senior Member Decision: (1) The appeal is allowed in part. (2) The appellant is to pay the respondent, VSD Glass & Timber Pty Ltd, within 14 days, the sum of $55,840.00 instead of the amount of $99,450.00 ordered to be paid by the Tribunal at first instance on 20 April 2020. (3) Leave to appeal on grounds other than a question of law is refused. (4) If there is to be any application for costs by either party then written submissions in support of such application are to be lodged with the Tribunal and served on the other side within 21 days, including submissions as to whether a hearing about costs can be dispensed with and any costs issues determined on the papers. Written submissions in response to any submissions from the other party are to be lodged with the Tribunal and served within 14 days thereafter. Catchwords: CONTRACT – parties to unwritten home building contract – quantum meruit claim- proof of reasonable value- relevance of contract prices- lack of proof of reasonable value for part of the works Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act (NSW) (2013) Home Building Act (NSW) 1989 Cases Cited: Bradshaw v Complete Coating Commercial Pty Ltd t/as CCC Civil [2017] NSWCATAP 209 Collins v Urban [2014] NSWCATAP 17 Gittany v Gittany [2014] NSWSC 761 Kostas v HIA Insurance Services Pty Ltd [2010] HCA 32; 241 CLR 390 Mann v Patterson Constructions Pty Ltd [2019] HCA 32 Pavey & Matthews Pty Ltd v Paul (1987) 162 CLR 221 Slotwinski v Nutek Constructions Pty Ltd; Nutek Constructions Pty Ltd v Slotwinski [2019] NSWCATAP 158 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Suecha Pty Ltd (Appellant) VSD Glass & Timber Pty Ltd (First Respondent) Simon Douaihy (Second Respondent) Representation: Counsel: D Weinberger (Appellant) A Hopkins (First Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate