Owners Corporation Court of Appeal Building Defects Win!

Adding Further Building Defects to an Existing Claim

On 17 April 2023, the New South Wales Court of Appeal in the case of Parkview Constructions Pty Ltd v The Owners – Strata Plan No. 90018 (Parkview), confirmed that an owners corporation can add new defects to an existing claim if the statutory warranty period in the Home Building Act 1989 (HBA) has not expired.

Supreme Court Amends Building Defects Statement of Claim

In the Parkview case, in the Supreme Court, the owners corporation sought to amend its Statement of Claim to add new defects. The Supreme Court granted permission to the owners corporation to add new defects to its existing claim.  The new defects that were added were not manifest when the owners corporation-initiated proceedings in the Supreme Court. Parkview appealed against the decision of the Supreme Court to the Court of Appeal.

Court of Appeal Win for Owners Corporation

The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the Supreme Court by confirming that the owners corporation was entitled to add new defects to its existing claim and the addition was not a new cause of action but part of a single cause of action being a breach by the builder of the statutory warranties under the HBA.

Parkview argued that the addition of new defects introduced a “new” cause of action, and those new causes of action were not the same as the existing cause of action that was on foot. The Court of Appeal rejected that argument. It held that in a conventional case for breach of contract, there is a single cause of action.  That cause of action is complete when a defective structure is provided irrespective of the number of ways in which those defects have manifested themselves.  The Court of Appeal said that even though the HBA has created inroads into common law principles, however, those changes brought by the HBA do not alter the nature of the owners corporation’s claim.

Furthermore, the Court of Appeal said that a successor in title like an owners corporation sues a builder or a developer for statutory warranties under the HBA. The proceeding is based upon a breach of a single contract.  An amendment does nothing more than introduce further departures from the building contract that the builder and the developer had promised and that does not give rise to a new cause of action because the cause of action remains one, that is for a breach of the same contract.  Accordingly, the Court of Appeal held that the owners corporation’s amendments seeking to add new defects did not introduce a new cause of action and so the owners corporation was entitled to add them to its existing claim.

A Victory for Owners Corporations in NSW

This confirmation from the Court of Appeal is a great victory for owners corporations in NSW and it reconfirms the willingness of the judiciary to protect owners in strata schemes wherever it may be necessary.


Faiyaaz Shafiq Lawyer JS Mueller & Co Lawyers specialising in Strata Law

Faiyaaz Shafiq I LLB GDLP I Lawyer

A highly experienced and respected, results driven Litigation Lawyer specialising in the areas of strata litigation, building & construction, commercial litigation, debt recovery, personal and company insolvency. Profile I Linked

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.




Do You Have Strata Buildings Less than 6 Years Old?

The NSW Government has announced a win for strata managers and owners corporations who have buildings under 6 years old.

You now have an avenue to pursue the rectification of any common property for major building defects, subject to eligibility.

Here we share the following:

  • Key information
  • What is Project Intervene?
  • Who is Eligible?
  • What is classified as common property?
  • What is a serious defect?
  • How do I register for ‘Project Intervene’?
  • Related information

For specific information visit NSW Government ‘Project Intervene

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.




Have Your Say on the NSW Proposed Building Reforms!

The NSW Government is working to increase confidence in the NSW building industry by creating a new foundation for construction, by looking at improvement of laws and consumers/workers protection.

The Government is committed to:

  • Improving safety, accountability and transparency
  • Ensuring high-quality design, construction and maintenance
  • Modernising and simplifying building legislation

How to Have Your Say!

To have your say on the proposed building laws reform in NSW you can:

  • Complete the all-in-one survey which allows you to skip through all topics to those that are of interest to you or;
  • If you are only interested in a single topic, you may complete one or more of the 7 individual survey topics
  • You may also make a submission which allows you to give detailed feedback or respond directly to the questions in the regulatory impact statements

Deadline for Your Feedback

To provide feedback please Friday 25 November 2022.

For more information, please refer to the NSW Government here.

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.




ABCB Announces NCC 2022! What are the Differences?

The Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) has announced the following in relation to the recent launch of the National Construction Code (NCC) 2022:

  • As of 1 May 2023, NCC 2022 will be adopted with a transition period until 1 October 2023
  • The transition period is for the modern homes provisions for energy efficiency, condensation mitigation and liveable (accessible) housing
  • While the transition dates from 1 May to 1 October 2023 are in place NCC 2019 will remain in force
  • Following 1 October 2023, NCC 2022 is to be adopted

How Different is NCC 2022?

  • Consistency improvements have been implemented across all volumes with a new structure and number convention
  • It is more web accessible with a significantly improved user experience and reorganised code’s
  • As part of the transition old clause numbers will be listed to the right of documents
  • You will be able to save a PDF version directly to your device or purchase a printed copy of NCC 2022
  • You will no longer need to sign in to NCC Online but you will need to register to ensure you stay up to date with notifications

For more information the National Building Code 2022 is available here NCC 2022

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.




Can Tenants Apply to NCAT for Rent Relief for Defects?

Tenants, Building Defects, NCAT and Rent Relief

 

In a recent case, a property manager failed to inform a landlord of defects in the common property of a strata building and take any steps to investigate issues that a tenant had complained about.

The tenant applied to NCAT for a rent reduction as the landlord had breached their obligation to keep the rented premises in a reasonable state of repair as water leaked into the premises. The tenant was successful.

Who Could be Liable?

 

If a tenant claims rent relief from NCAT due to defects in a strata building, it’s important to note that NCAT could deem that it is the responsibility of the:

  • Landlord who could lose rent (or worse) if they do nothing;
  • Property manager if they fail to fix defects in the premises that they are authorised to repair following a tenant’s complaint in a timely manner;
  • Property manager if they have not advised the landlord of defects (where they are not authorised organise repairs) following a tenant’s complaint;
  • Owners corporation who could also be held liable for a landlord’s loss of rent.

A Timely Reminder for Managing Agents!

Ensure your professional indemnity insurance is current;

  • Ensure your professional indemnity insurance is current
  • Obtain landlord consent on a minimum amount for repair works which can be dealt with without the landlord’s approval;
  • Allocate sufficient resources to attend to repair requests in a timely manner to avoid issues which could lead to court proceedings;
  • Request that any common property defects are promptly repaired by the owners corporation;
  • Ensure that the relevant strata by-laws for the apartment block are up to date to minimise your risk

Here we share some cases…

Contact Us

 

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.




Court Widens People Liable for Building Defects!

Building Defects – Who is Liable?

Can the director of a building company that is responsible for the construction of a new strata building be held personally liable for defects in the building?

The Design and Building Practitioners Act 2020 (Act) was introduced in 2020 and provides that a duty of care is owed by “a person who carries out construction work” to an owners corporation to avoid defects in the construction of the building. But who exactly is classified as “a person who carries out construction work”?

Is “a person who carries out construction work” limited to the entity that was contracted to do the work such as the builder or does it also include all persons involved in completing the project such as a supervisor, project manager and even the director of the builder’s company or the developer?

Personal Liability of Project Manager

A recent decision by the Supreme Court of NSW has found that the husband of a director of a building company was personally liable for defective building works done by the builder under the Act because he acted as the project manager and supervisor of the builder: see Goodwin Street Developments Pty Ltd atf Jesmond Unit Trust v DSD Builders Pty Ltd (in liq) [2022] NSWSC 624.

In this case, the builder was placed into liquidation and the developer brought proceedings against Mr Roberts the husband of a director of the builder.  According to the Court, Mr Roberts was a project manager of the builder, supervising construction works for the project. Therefore, Mr Roberts was found to be “a person who carried out construction work” under the Act and was found liable for the defects.

Liability of Developer

In another recent Supreme Court case, an owners corporation sued the builder and developer for damages arising from defects.

The Court found, among other things, that a developer could be held liable for defects under the Act as a person who carried out construction work.

The Court also said that under the Act, a person could be liable for defects if they could (but did not necessarily) have control of the building works: see The Owners – Strata Plan No 84674 v Pafburn Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 659.

Conclusion

These cases have far reaching consequences for directors, supervisors, project managers, developers and sub-contractors involved in construction work who all could be liable to owners corporations for defects under the Act, even for work done up to 10 years ago (as the Act is retrospective). However, for those persons to be liable, it must be proven that they have had or could have had some control over the building works.

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.




Who Pays? NCAT Takes it to the Next Level!

Who Pays the Compensation?

When an owners corporation is ordered to compensate an owner, who pays that compensation?  The owners corporation, right?  A recent decision by NCAT’s Appeal Panel produced a surprising answer to that question.

Introduction

An owners corporation has a statutory duty to properly maintain and keep in good repair the common property.  This duty arises under section 106 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015.  If an owners corporation does not repair defects in the common property, it will breach that duty.  Where that occurs, a lot owner who suffers monetary loss arising from that breach is able to sue the owners corporation to recover that loss.

Previous Cases

There have been a number of cases where both NCAT and the Supreme Court have ordered owners corporations to pay compensation to owners to cover their losses arising from failures to repair defects in common property that typically allow water to leak into and cause damage to lots. In those cases, owners have been awarded compensation for rental loss, alternate accommodation expenses, cleaning costs, repair costs, experts’ fees and legal costs.  But when an owners corporation is ordered to compensate an owner for those losses, who ends up paying that compensation? The answer to that question should be straightforward, right? Not so.

NCAT Case

On 30 November 2021, NCAT’s Appeal Panel handed down its decision in SP 74698 v Jacinta Investments Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCATAP 387.  In that case, an owner had sued an owners corporation for (among other things) compensation to cover the owner’s losses that arose from an owners corporation’s breach of its duty to repair common property.  The owner was successful and was awarded over $250,000.00 in compensation.  NCAT also ordered that the compensation be paid through a contribution that was levied on all owners except the successful owner who won the case.  The owners corporation appealed against that aspect of NCAT’s decision (and others). NCAT’s Appeal Panel upheld the decision.  The Appeal Panel concluded that it would be unjust for the successful owner to have to contribute towards the payment of the compensation the owners corporation had been ordered to pay the owner.  This meant that the owners corporation was required to levy a contribution on all owners (apart from the successful owner) to raise the funds needed to pay the compensation it was ordered to pay.  The owners corporation was also ordered to pay the owner’s costs of the case and those costs were determined to be payable through a contribution to be levied on all of the other owners.

The Wash Up

The Jacinta Investments case provides an example of one of the rare circumstances in which an owners corporation is able impose a differential levy on some but not all owners.  The case also highlights that individual owners can be made liable to pay compensation that an owners corporation is ordered to pay to another owner to cover any damage or loss the owner suffers where the owners corporation does not fulfill its responsibility to repair common property.

The Future

The Jacinta Investments case has broader implications.  It opens the door for owners to argue in legal proceedings in NCAT that they should not be required to contribute to the payment of costs an owners corporation will incur repairing common property or consequential damage to lot property.  So, for example, where an owner sues an owners corporation in NCAT for an order to force the owners corporation to repair common property defects and water damage to the owner’s lot caused by those defects, the owner may now be able to obtain an order from NCAT excusing the owner from having to contribute to a levy that is raised to pay for those repairs.  Stay tuned because there is likely to be another chapter to this story.

Author I Adrian Mueller, Partner I B.Com LLB FACCAL.

Contact Us

For all strata law advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact our specialist NSW and Sydney strata lawyers here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.

Follow Us


Linkedin


Twitter


Envelope




Landmark Ruling and WIN for Any Owners Corporations!

Relevant for Any Owners Corporation with Combustible Cladding on Their Building.

On 18 October 2021, the NSW Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of Taylor Construction Group Pty Ltd v The Owners – Strata Plan No. 92888 [2021] NSWSC 1315, confirming that biowood cladding is combustible cladding that poses a risk of fire spread between levels on the façade of an apartment building. Muellers represented the successful owners corporation in NCAT and also in the Supreme Court – a WIN for all owners corporations.

Senior Lawyer, Faiyaaz Shafiq, JS Mueller & Co Lawyers, said, “The outcome of the case represents a major win for owners corporations strengthening the basis for claims by owners corporations against builders and developers who have installed combustible cladding on their buildings.”

“I have no doubt it will see a marked shift in the way in which builders and developers respond to combustible cladding claims”, said Faiyaaz.

The owners corporation initially commenced proceedings in NCAT against the builder and developer seeking orders that biowood cladding installed on the façade of its building be replaced or compensation be paid to cover the cost to replace the cladding.

The owners corporation claimed that the cladding was combustible or created an undue risk of fire spread in breach of the statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989 because it did not comply with the Building Code of Australia and was not fit for its purpose.

NCAT ordered that the defective biowood cladding be rectified by the builder and developer. The builder/developer appealed NCAT’s findings to NCAT’s Appeal Panel which dismissed the appeal.

The builder/developer then appealed to the NSW Supreme Court.

The NSW Supreme Court on 18 October 2021 gave a comprehensive judgment dismissing the appeal. In doing so, the Court accepted the owners corporation’s arguments that:

  1. biowood cladding is combustible;
  2. there is a risk that fire will spread beyond the floor of origin because the material from which the biowood is made will support fire spread between the levels of the building;
  3. there was evidence from the fire safety engineer of the owners corporation that there is an undue risk of fire spreading due to the biowood;
  4. there was no evidence to support the contention of the builder/developer that a slower rate of fire spread does not present an undue risk in comparison with a higher rate of spread; and
  5. there was evidence that sprinklers or any other fire safety measure would have no relevance to external fire spread.

Furthermore, the Court also agreed with the owners corporation’s submission that combustible cladding is not fit for purpose which is one of the categories of the statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989.

The Court has reaffirmed the view that the fundamental fire safety requirement for a class 2 apartment building requires external walls to be non-combustible, and cladding installed in a multi-storey apartment building which does not comply with the BCA is not suitable for the purpose for which it is used.

The Court’s judgment confirms the view the owners corporation always held that biowood poses an unacceptable fire safety risk.

The Court’s judgment is a landmark ruling that is relevant to any owners corporation that has combustible cladding on its building.

The ruling strengthens the basis for claims by owners corporations against builders and developers who have installed combustible cladding on their buildings and should see a marked shift in the way in which builder and developers respond to those claims.

Note: Faiyaaz Shafiq of JS Mueller & Co Lawyers acted for the successful owners corporation and was assisted by barristers Tom Davie and Anita Power of Queen’s Square Chambers.

If you or your owners corporation require advice about combustible cladding, please contact our expert team now.

For all NSW strata legal advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact us here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.




Must an Owners Corporation Repair Lot Property

In last week’s newsletter article, we reported on a recent NCAT case in which an owners corporation was ordered to repair damage to lot property caused by a common property roof leak.

Our article generated considerable interest. The NCAT decision begs the question: Is an owners corporation responsible for repairing lot property?

In this article, we take a closer look at that issue and consider whether the NCAT case we reported on last week (Mastellone v The Owners – Strata Plan No. 87110 [2021] NSWCATAP 188) was correctly decided.

Read the full article Is an Owners Corporation Responsible for Repairing Lot Property?

For all NSW strata legal advice including by-laws, building defects and levy collections contact us here or call 02 9562 1266, we’re happy to assist.




NSW Combustible Cladding Taskforce – Who is Eligible?

The NSW Government has recently established a Cladding Taskforce known as ‘Project Remediate’.

This Taskforce will:

  • Identify residential buildings with potential combustible cladding issues
  • Address the use of non-compliant cladding materials with local councils

As of February 2021, 185,000 building records have been audited by the Taskforce with 4,127 buildings inspected.

It is important to note that not all cladding is dangerous. Fire + Rescue NSW (FRNSW) have been engaged to assist the Taskforce in determining building risk. Those buildings considered a higher risk will be further referred to consent authorities such as their Local Council or the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment (DPIE) for further investigation.

Register your interest in ‘Project Remediate’ here.

What is ‘Project Remediate’?

‘Project Remediate’ is a 3 year program designed to help remove combustible cladding from eligible residential buildings who will receive:

  • Interest free loans over a 10 year period with loan payments commencing after the completion of work
  • Assurance and project management services offering technical, risk and practical support to owners corporations and strata managers
  • A free 2-hour course on Project Remediate (free until 30 September 2021, following a fee of $140.00 will apply). This course is designed for strata managers and committee members of affected buildings to help them explain ‘Project Remediate’ to lot owners, to enable lot owners to make informed decisions.

Who is Eligible for ‘Project Remediate’?

To be eligible for ‘Project Remediate’ support, the building must be either:

  • A residential apartment building (Class 2) located in NSW approved by the Taskforce to have a high-risk combustible cladding façade which requires remediation
  • A multi-use building which has part commercial/residential located in NSW approved by the Taskforce to have a high-risk combustible cladding façade which requires remediation

Do you need More Information on ‘Project Remediate’?

For more specific information please visit:

Do You Need Further Assistance with Combustible Cladding Issues?

Combustible cladding (and building defects) is a complex area of the law.

The team at JS Mueller & Co Lawyers has unparalleled knowledge and experience dealing with many cases in this complex area of the law.

JS Mueller & Co Lawyers published flammable cladding cases:

If you would like assistance with flammable cladding (and/or building defect) issues, please contact us now, we are here to help you.