Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 25 JULY 2023

Cladding Claims Revisited

Holding Redlich
Holding Redlich
Contributor
Holding Redlich

Holding Redlich

Holding Redlich is a large national commercial firm with offices in Melbourne, Canberra, Sydney,...

View firm profile
Explore more from Holding Redlich

Recent decision likely to stand as authority on what is necessary to prove in a cladding claim & the extent of the evidentiary onus.

AustraliaReal Estate and Construction

In the Strata Plan 92450 v JKN Para 1 Pty Ltd & Anor [2022] decision, although the Supreme Court found that the ACP cladding did not comply with the deemed-to-satisfy provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA), it did not award damages, finding that there was no breach of the Home Building Act (HBA) statutory warranties. See our case summary here.

On appeal, the NSW Court of Appeal overturned the primary decision, finding that the primary judge erred in:

  • not finding a breach of section 18B(1)(c) of the HBA
  • placing the onus on the Owners Corporation to prove that an alternative solution was not and would never be available to rectify breaches of the BCA
  • not awarding damages.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

This publication does not deal with every important topic or change in law and is not intended to be relied upon as a substitute for legal or other advice that may be relevant to the reader's specific circumstances. If you have found this publication of interest and would like to know more or wish to obtain legal advice relevant to your circumstances please contact one of the named individuals listed.

See more popular content from