The Owners - Strata Plan No. 72827 v Isaac [2013] NSWSC 595

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: The Owners - Strata Plan No. 72827 v Isaac [2013] NSWSC 595 Hearing dates: 20 May 2013 Decision date: 20 May 2013 Jurisdiction: Equity Division - Technology and Construction List Before: Stevenson J Decision: Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of $1,218,338 plus costs Catchwords: BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION - Home Building Act 1989 - Statutory warranties Legislation Cited: Home Building Act 1989 Strata Schemes (Freehold Development) Act 1973 Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 Category: Principal judgment Parties: The Owners - Strata Plan No. 72827 (plaintiff) Nazih Isaac (defendant) (no appearance) Representation: Counsel: J J Young (plaintiff) Solicitors: Grace Lawyers (plaintiff) File Number(s): SC 2012/264305 Publication restriction: Nil

Judgment

Introduction 1In these proceedings the plaintiff seeks damages from the defendant, who was the builder of a strata residential apartment development at Harris Park in Sydney. The plaintiff's claim arises from defects and deficiencies in the common property in that development which the plaintiff contends amount to breaches of the statutory warranties ("the Statutory Warranties") provided for by Pt 2C of the Home Building Act 1989 ("the Act"). 2The proceedings were initially commenced in the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal ("the CTTT") and were transferred to this Court in 2012. 3The defendant was served with the originating process in the CTTT but has not appeared at the CTTT or in this Court. On 16 November 2011, the defendant told the solicitor for the plaintiff "I do not intend to defend these proceedings". 4On 23 November 2012, I set the proceedings down for hearing on 20 February 2013 as an undefended matter. On the application of the plaintiff, that hearing date was vacated to accommodate a delay in the production of the evidence relied on by the plaintiff, and the matter was set down for hearing today. 5I am satisfied that the defendant is aware of today's hearing date and that he has been served with the evidence on which the plaintiff relies. The defendant was called outside the Court. There was no appearance.