Pool and Spa Builders Pty Ltd v Nicole McCarthy and Andrew McCarthy [2014] NSWCATAP 108

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Pool and Spa Builders Pty Ltd v Nicole McCarthy and Andrew McCarthy [2014] NSWCATAP 108 Hearing dates: Determined on the papers Decision date: 16 December 2014 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: S Westgarth, Deputy President R Titterton, Principal Member Decision: 1. The application for leave to appeal is dismissed 2. The appeal is otherwise dismissed Catchwords: Appeal - Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NSW) Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act NSW (2013) Cases Cited: BHP Billiton Ltd v Dunning [2013] NSWCA 421 Collins v Urban [2014] NSWCATAP 17 Nakad v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force [2014] NSWCATAP 10 Pholi v Wearne [2014] NSWCATAP 78 Texts Cited: - Category: Principal judgment Parties: Pool and Spa Builders Pty Ltd (appellant) Nicole McCarthy and Andrew McCarthy (respondent) Representation: - - File Number(s): AP14/46400 Publication restriction: - Decision under appeal Jurisdiction: 150003 Citation: - Date of Decision: 2014-05-01 00:00:00 Before: K Ross File Number(s): HB 12/61334

reasons for decision

Introduction 1In this matter the appellant seeks to appeal against a decision of a member sitting in the Consumer and Commercial Division of the Tribunal (the Tribunal). The respondents had alleged that the work done by the appellant in the construction of a swimming pool was not carried out in a proper and workmanlike manner and was in breach the warranties contained in the Home Building Act 1989. After a hearing on 1 May 2014, at which the appellant did not appear, the Tribunal ordered the appellant to pay the respondents the sum of $14,374.80 compensation, being the cost of rectification of the swimming pool. 2The appellant seeks orders from the Appeal Panel setting aside the Tribunal's order and that the proceedings be returned to the Tribunal for re-hearing. 3Subject to a question of law we discuss later in these reasons. This is a matter in which the appellant requires leave to appeal. For the reasons below, we consider that leave to appeal should be refused, and that the appeal otherwise be dismissed.