Ultra Modern Developments Pty Ltd v Hill-Harrison [2014] NSWCATCD 185

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Ultra Modern Developments Pty Ltd v Hill-Harrison [2014] NSWCATCD 185 Hearing dates: 14 August 2014 Decision date: 30 September 2014 Before: P Boyce, Senior Member Decision: That the Home Owner is not required to pay the Builder the final instalment as claimed by the Builder of $10,045.79. The Builder must pay the Home Owner compensation in the amount of $12,779.00 on or before 7 January 2015. Catchwords: Building Contract, variations, quantum meruit, damages Legislation Cited: Home Building Act 1989 Australian Consumer Law Fair Trading Act 1987 Personal Property Securities Act 2009 (Cth) Cases Cited: Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch 341 Floruit Holdings Pty Ltd & Anor v Sebastion-Builders & Developers Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 303 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ultra Modern Developments Pty Ltd (applicant/ cross respondent) Peter Hill-Harrison a(respondent/cross applicant) Representation: W J Carney for the applicant M McMahon for the respondent File Number(s): HB 13/62096 and HB 14/03840 Publication restriction: None

reasons for decision

Application 1Application HB 13/62096 is a building claim by the holder of a Contractor's licence issued under the Home Building Act 1989 (called in these reasons for decision "Builder") for an order that a home owner (called in these reasons for decision "Home Owner") pay an amount of $10,045.79 being the balance of monies alleged to be due under a Contract for residential building work. 2Application 14/03840 is a building claim in the nature of a cross claim by the Home Owner for an order that the Builder pay to the Home Owner: (a)Overcharging in respect of unsigned variations in the amount of $9,690.83; (b)Liquidated damages in the amount of $17,458.87; (c)Further or in the alternative to (b) above, loss of use of property in the amount of $800 per week (for 2 units); (d)The sum of $18,350.00 in respect of the deletion of the construction of eave overhangs from the scope of works. 3The applications are heard together and the evidence of one application is the evidence of the other. 4In these reasons for decision the parties are referred to respectively as the Builder and the Home Owner.