Expiry of a limitation period to your home building defects claim in the Tribunal

The recent case of Crystele Designer Homes Pty Ltd v Wood [2024] NSWSC 1438, brought before the Supreme Court by Crystele Designer Homes Pty Ltd (Crystele), challenged the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to adjudicate claims related to non-major defects allegedly filed outside the statutory two-year time limit.  

Crystele appealed a decision by the Appeal Panel of the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) concerning defects in residential building work under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) (HBA).

The court examined the statutory framework, particularly the provisions of the HBA and the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) (NCAT Act), which govern the time limits and jurisdiction for building defect claims.

Issue relating to time limit

The points of claim were filed on 13 November 2020 claiming 22 defects identified at the property. The filing date was four days outside the two-year time limit in relation to defects other than “major defects” prescribed by the HBA. The amended summons alleged that the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction to adjudicate a claim in respect of defects that do not constitute a major defect and that did not form part of the application lodged because they were lodged outside of the time period stipulated by the HBA.

Decision

The Court found that the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to hear claims for both major and non-major defects, even if the particulars of the defects were filed after the statutory time limit. This was due to the Tribunal's power to extend time limits under section 41 of the NCAT Act. The Court emphasised the legislative intent to provide a less formal and more accessible forum for resolving building disputes, ensuring that all issues between the parties could be addressed comprehensively.

The Court also addressed Crystele’s grounds for appeal, which included alleged jurisdictional errors and errors of law by the Tribunal. However, it dismissed these grounds, finding no jurisdictional error and determining that the Tribunal had acted within its discretion.

Additionally, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to issue a monetary order instead of a rectification order, citing the breakdown of trust between the parties and the potential for further disputes. It concluded that the Tribunal's decisions aligned with the legislative framework and did not warrant interference.

As a result, the court dismissed the appeal and ordered Crystele to pay Wood’s costs.

Key Takeaway 

The Crystele Designer Homes Pty Ltd v Wood [2024] NSWSC 1438 case confirms the Tribunal’s broad jurisdiction over building disputes, including claims filed outside statutory time limits under section 41 of the NCAT Act. It reinforces the Tribunal’s role as an accessible dispute resolution forum and uphold its discretion to issue monetary orders where rectification is impractical. The decision also highlights the high threshold for providing jurisdictional error in Tribunal proceedings.

For more information about how this decision may impact your defect claims, please contact one of our people.

Ron Zucker 0410 590 111

Eollyn Cortes 0478 727 395

Sagang Chung 0431 435 333

Julia Zou 0426 670 202