| Owners Strata Plan 73162 v Dyldam Developments Pty Ltd (NSWSC) - costs - defective building works - unreasonable failure to agree to settlement proposal - builder to pay owner's costs |
| District Council of Coober Pedy v Aboriginal Family Support Services (SASCFC) - environment and planning - proposed development was non-complying - appeal allowed |
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
Owners Strata Plan 73162 v Dyldam Developments Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 1789
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Nicholas AJ
Costs - proceedings by owner against builder for rectification of defective works settled except in respect of legal costs - agreed under deed that builder would rectify defects in respect of which it had admitted liability in accordance with scope of work specified in agreed experts' reports and under supervision of independent superintendent - owner sought orders that builder pay costs for period after date of last expert report - orders sought on basis costs followed event and they had been substantially successful - reasonableness of failure to agree to settlement proposal - held: no rational explanation for builder's rejection of owner's terms of settlement until eve of hearing - builder's stance was exercise in brinkmanship - owner had achieved by settlement the relief sought from the outset - settlement represented capitulation by builder rather than a comprise of litigation - builder to pay owner's costs.
Owners Strata Plan 73162 |
District Council of Coober Pedy v Aboriginal Family Support Services [2014] SASCFC 133
Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia
Kourakis CJ; Vanstone & Parker JJ
Environment and planning - Aboriginal Family Support Services Inc (AFSS) established community support facilities on residential land in Coober Pedy - AFSS sought development approval - District Council of Coober Pedy appealed against decision of Environment, Resources and Development Court of South Australia (ERD Court) which set aside its refusal to approve development and held that proposed application was not a non-complying development - held: ERD Court failed to recognise use of rooms as offices - rooms used as offices not an insignificant portion of house - proposed development was non-complying office development - ERD Court erred in construing Development Plan or gave weight to an irrelevant consideration - appeal is allowed - orders of ERD Court set aside - AFSS's appeal to ERD Court dismissed.
District Council of Coober Pedy |
