RBV Builders Pty Ltd v Chedra [2021] NSWCATAP 56

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: RBV Builders Pty Ltd v Chedra [2021] NSWCATAP 56 Hearing dates: 15 June 2020 Date of orders: 11 March 2021 Decision date: 11 March 2021 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: K Rosser, Principal Member D Robertson, Senior Member Decision: AP 20/09081 (1) Leave to appeal refused. (2) Appeal dismissed. (3) Unless either party files written submissions seeking a different order within 14 days of the date of publication of this decision, the appellant is to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal as agreed or assessed. (4) Any application in respect of the costs of the appeal is to be made by written submissions filed and served within 14 days of the date of publication of this decision. Such submissions should address the question whether the application can be dealt with on the papers and without a hearing pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act. (5) If either party files submissions in accordance with order 4 above the other party may file and serve submissions in response within a further 14 days. Such submissions should address the question whether the application can be dealt with on the papers and without a hearing pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act. In AP 20/18109: (1) Leave to appeal refused. (2) Appeal dismissed. (3) Unless either party files written submissions seeking a different order within 14 days of the date of publication of this decision there will be no order as to the costs of the appeal. (4) Any application in respect of the costs of the appeal is to be made by written submissions filed and served within 14 days of the date of publication of this decision. Such submissions should address the question whether the application can be dealt with on the papers and without a hearing pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act. (5) If either party files submissions in accordance with order 4 above the other party may file and serve submissions in response within a further 14 days. Such submissions should address the question whether the application can be dealt with on the papers and without a hearing pursuant to s 50(2) of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act. Catchwords: BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION — Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) — Statutory warranty – Plans and specifications – Whether specifications included oral instructions – Defences – section 18F – Whether contract drawings constitute an "instruction given in writing" for the purposes of s 18F COSTS – Relevant considerations Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2014 (NSW) Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) Cases Cited: Applicant WAEE v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (2003) 236 FCR 593 Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Darrell Lea Chocolate Shops Pty Ltd (No 3) [2007] FCAFC 11 Catapult Constructions Pty Ltd v Denison [2018] NSWCATAP 158 Collins v Urban [2014] NSWCATAP 17 Haviv Holdings Pty Ltd v Howards Storage World Pty Ltd (No 2) [2009] FCA 652 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Kimberley Developments Pty Ltd v Cicihour Pty Ltd [2020] NSWCATAP 213Meacham v Commissioner of Police [2020] NSWCATAP 107 Mitchell v Cullingral Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 389 Norris v Routley [2016] NSWSC 147 Prendergast v Western Murray Irrigation Ltd [2014] NSWCATAP 69 Texts Cited: Dal Pont, Law of Costs, 4th ed 2018 Category: Principal judgment Parties: RBV Builders Pty Ltd (Appellant) George Chedra & Nerida Chedra (Respondents) Representation: Counsel: P Moorhouse (Appellant) B Kaplan (Respondents)