Grygiel v Baine & Ors

[2005] NSWCA 218

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Administrative Law
2. › Tribunals
3. › Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal
4. › Jurisdiction
5. › Building claims
6. › Whether claim for negligent legal advice constitutes a 'building claim'
7. › Whether claim 'arises from' supply of building goods or services
8. › Home Building Act 1989 (NSW), s 48A
1. Administrative Law
2. › Tribunals
3. › Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal
4. › Jurisdiction
5. › Building claims
6. › Collateral contract
7. › Whether contract for legal services 'collateral to' contract for supply of building services
8. › Home Building Act 1989 (NSW), s 48A
1. Administrative Law
2. › Tribunals
3. › Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal
4. › Appeals
5. › Appeal on question of law
6. › Whether interlocutory decisions appealable
7. › Whether leave to appeal should be granted
8. › Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 (NSW), s 67
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Joinder of parties
3. › Whether company should be joined as co-plaintiff
4. › Whether refusal involved decision on matter of law

Quick Take

A claim for negligent legal advice can constitute a 'building claim' under s 48A of the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) where the advice relates to the terms on which building services were supplied, giving the CTTT jurisdiction. The word 'collateral' in s 48A should be construed broadly, in the sense of 'related to', following David Securities v Commonwealth Bank. The single-judge authorities (Woolfe v Sussman, Collings Homes v Head, Brett Wolinski v HIA) applied an overly restrictive test to the definition of 'building claim'.