NSW Caselaw
Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Romas and Olympia Linas v John Robert Maroon, Chris Maroon and Archiform Group Pty Ltd [2014] NSWCATCD 51 Decision date: 16 April 2014 Before: D Goldstein, Senior Member Decision: The first respondent must pay the applicants the sum of $61,766.19 within 21 days of the date of the order as damages for breach of contract. The applicants' claim for $14,969.00 for overpayments is dismissed. The applicants' claim against the second respondent in connection with project management services is dismissed. The applicants' claim against the first and second respondents under the Australian Consumer Law is dismissed. The parties are at liberty to make a costs application in these proceedings. Any costs application pursuant to section 53 of the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 must be lodged in the Tribunal and served on the costs respondent within 21 days of the date of this order either attaching or referring to the documents relied upon in support of the application. The costs respondent will have 21 days after the date it receives the application referred to in the preceding paragraph to lodge in the Tribunal and serve on the costs applicant its submissions, if any, in response to the cost applicant's costs application, such submissions either attaching or referring to the documents relied upon. The cost applicant will have 14 days after the date it receives the cost respondent's submissions to lodge in the Tribunal and serve on the costs respondent its submissions, if any, in reply, such submissions either attaching or referring to the documents relied upon. The Tribunal will determine any costs application on the basis of the submissions and document lodged in the Tribunal. Legislation Cited: Home Building Act 1989 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Romas and Olympia Linas (applicants) John Robert Maroon (respondent) Chris Maroon (respondent) Archiform Group Pty Ltd (respondent) Representation: Mr Weinburger (for the applicants) Gadens Lawyers (for the applicants) The first respondent was self-represented File Number(s): HB 13/39778 Publication restriction: Unrestricted
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