Akratos v Papadopoulos [2016] NSWCATAP 139

Civil and Administrative Tribunal New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Akratos v Papadopoulos [2016] NSWCATAP 139 Hearing dates: 20 July 2015 Date of orders: 28 June 2016 Decision date: 28 June 2016 Jurisdiction: Appeal Panel Before: S Higgins, Principal Member D Goldstein, Senior Member Decision: 1. The appellant's application for leave to appeal is refused.

2. The appellant's appeal is otherwise dismissed.

3. The stay granted on 18 July 2014 is lifted forthwith. Catchwords: Appeal Legislation Cited: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 Civil and Administrative Tribunal Rules 2013 Home Building Act 1989 Cases Cited: Amad El Ahmad t/as Cars for Everyone v Imelda Reyes [2015] NSWCATAP 50 Collins v Urban [2014] NSWCATAP 17 Gallo v Duflou [2014] NSWCATAP 115 Williams v NSW Land and Housing Corporation [2012] NSWSC 1022 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Dimos Akratos (appellant) Christos Papadopoulos Representation: A Akratos as agent for the appellant File Number(s): AP 14/46455 Decision under appeal Court or tribunal: Civil and Administrative Tribunal Jurisdiction: Consumer and Commercial Division Date of Decision: 05 June 2014 Before: D Hurley, Tribunal Member File Number(s): HB 14/13357

Reasons for decision

Introduction 1. The appellant, Dimos Akratos, seeks to appeal the decision of the Tribunal, in the Consumer and Commercial Division, in file no HB 14/13357, made on 5 June 2014. The decision related to a renewal application the respondent, Christos Papadopoulos, had made, on 4 March 2014, under cl 8 of Schedule 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013. The respondent's renewal application related to orders the former Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal (CTTT) had made, on 12 December 2013, in regard to a home building claim the respondent had made against the appellant under the Home Building Act 1989 (file no HB 13/43290). The respondent's home building claim related to steel security gates, fences and security grills the appellant supplied and installed at the respondent's home. 2. The orders made by the CTTT, on 12 December 2013, in regard to the respondent's (applicant below) home building claim were as follows: "1. The Tribunal orders that the respondent(s): Dimos Akratos [address] is to cause the undertaking of the following work in a proper and workmanlike manner on or before 10-Feb-2014. Details of Work order: The respondent or his representative together with no more than three licensed trades persons are to inspect the work that the respondent performed at the applicant's home. The inspection is to be arranged on 48 hours prior notice. The respondent is then to engage licensed trades persons to repair the defective work that he performed at the applicant's home. The rectification work is to be completed on or before 10 February 2014 and at the expense of the respondent. Additionally, 2. The applicant has the right to renew the claim before the Tribunal within one year of today if the rectification work is not completed in a proper and tradesman like manner or if the work is not completed at all. If the claim is renewed before the Tribunal then that application should include some expert evidence and quotations for the repair of the defective work. REASONS …" 1. By reason of cl 14 of Schedule 1 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act, as at the date of the establishment of this Tribunal and the abolition of the CTTT (i.e. 1 January 2014), the above decision of the CTTT was taken to have been an order made by this Tribunal, in the corresponding provision of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act (i.e. a decision of the Tribunal in the Consumer and Commercial Division). Accordingly, the decision of the CTTT in regard to the respondent's home building claim became an order of this Tribunal under the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act and the respondent's existing right to make a renewal application was preserved: see Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act, Schedule 1, clause 9. 2. Clause 8 of Schedule 4 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act expressly makes provision for the Tribunal, in the Consumer and Commercial Division, to make an order for the renewal of proceedings in certain circumstances. There is no dispute the respondent's (applicant below) renewal application was validly made. 3. The orders made by the Tribunal, on 5 June 2014, in respect to the respondent's renewal application, were as follows: "1. Dimos Akratos C/- [address] is to pay Chris Papadopoulos [address] the sum of $7,500 on or before 07-Jul-2014. Brief Reasons [Reasons] …. 2. The Tribunal orders that the applicant(s): Chritos Papadopoulos [address] is to carry out the following work before 08-July-2014 in a proper workman like manner. Details of Work order: [details]… 1. It is this decision the appellant identified in his Notice of Appeal that he seeks to appeal. 2. The appellant's appeal was heard on 20 July 2015. The appellant had previously been granted leave to be represented by his son at the hearing. The respondent had also been granted leave to be represented by his daughter. However, at the hearing there was no appearance by, or on behalf of the respondent. We called the telephone number of the respondent's daughter as identified on the respondent's Reply to Appeal. There was no answer. On being satisfied the respondent had been notified, by mail, of the hearing date we proceeded to hear the appellant's appeal. 3. At the conclusion of the hearing we reserved our decision. For the reasons set out below we have determined to refuse the appellant's application for leave to appeal and dismissed his appeal.