The Court held that the word 'variation' in a special condition of an HIA residential building contract, which permitted the builder to revise the contract price if construction had not commenced within 180 days, was to be construed as a variation within the meaning of cl 18 of the contract (requiring written acceptance by the owner), rather than as a general contractual variation. Consequently, the owner's failure to sign and return the builder's price increase document (BV-2) was not a 'substantial breach' under cl 27.2(f) entitling the builder to terminate; rather, under cl 18.4, the unsigned variation was deemed withdrawn, leaving the builder free to walk away but not to terminate for breach and recover damages. The principle that words specifically added by parties to a standard form contract are given greater weight than the standard terms was applied, reinforced by the fact that the statutory warning under s 7(5) of the Home Building Act referenced cl 18 but not the special condition.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.