Keep­ing you up-to-date with the lat­est legal devel­op­ments, leg­is­la­tion changes and case precedents.

All pub­li­ca­tions relat­ing to ​‘Con­struc­tion & Infrastructure’

A High­er Evi­den­tiary Bur­den for Work Orders: The Prac­ti­cal Impli­ca­tions of The Own­ers – Stra­ta Plan No 102171 v Ceerose Pty Ltd [2025] NSW­CATCD 137

The deci­sion in The Own­ers – Stra­ta Plan No 102171 v Ceerose Pty Ltd; Zone Q Mil­sons Point Devel­op­ment Pty Ltd v Ceerose Pty Ltd; Ceerose Pty Ltd v South­ern Cross Cli­mate Con­trol Pty Ltd [2025] NSW­CATCD 137 is a sig­nif­i­cant devel­op­ment in under­stand­ing the evi­den­tiary oblig­a­tions of an appli­cant when seek­ing a work order under…

Strata Plan 92183 v Samdora Pty Ltd [2026] NSWSC 406 | 'Substantive Control' over Works & s37 of the DB&P Act

In this case, the plain­tiff (Stra­ta Plan 92183) brought pro­ceed­ings alleg­ing defec­tive res­i­den­tial build­ing work in rela­tion to 9 town hous­es locat­ed in Manger­ton, NSW.Rel­e­vant­ly SP92183 claimed that both the builder’s direc­tor (Mr Nas­sif) and the developer’s direc­tor (Mr Chah­wan) had both breached their duty to exer­cise rea­son­able care to avoid eco­nom­ic…

SP6534 v Elkhouri; Own­ers Cor­po­ra­tion SP6534 v Per­pet­u­al Cor­po­rate Trust Ltd [2024] NSW­CA 279 (in Eq. Div) (27 Novem­ber 2024)

Back­ground and PartiesMr. Elkhouri (Elkhouri) owned Lot 11, a pent­house apart­ment in an 11 lot res­i­den­tial stra­ta scheme at Point Piper, Syd­ney. The lot occu­pied the top two lev­els of the build­ing and includ­ed bal­conies and rooftop areas that were com­mon prop­er­ty. When Elkhouri pur­chased Lot 11 in 2007, he had no exclu­sive rights…

Ober­to Pty Ltd v The Own­ers Stra­ta Plan No 2004 No 2 [2026] NSW­CATCD 24 & costs in Stra­ta Dis­putes – Rule 38 of Civ­il and Admin­is­tra­tive Rules 2014

After a lot own­er was suc­cess­ful in its claim for dam­ages in an apart­ment build­ing as a result of an own­ers cor­po­ra­tion’s breach of statu­to­ry duty under sec­tion 106(1) of the Stra­ta Schemes Man­age­ment Act 2015, the Tri­bunal applied rule 38 of the Civ­il and Admin­is­tra­tive Rules 2014 (r38) to award costs…

The Expand­ing Scope of Devel­op­er and Builder Lia­bil­i­ty: Own­ers Stra­ta Plan No 66375 v King [2018] NSW­CA 170

The New South Wales Court of Appeal’s deci­sion in The Own­ers Stra­ta Plan No 66375 v King remains one of the most sig­nif­i­cant author­i­ties on statu­to­ry war­ranties under the Home Build­ing Act 1989 (NSW). The case clar­i­fied both the inter­pre­ta­tion of sec­tion 18B war­ranties and the breadth of a developer’s lia­bil­i­ty to…

No Appor­tion­ment for Sec­tion 37 DBP Act Claims even where the alleged con­cur­rent wrong­do­er is not a sub­con­trac­tor of the builder

Kapi­la v Mon­u­ment Build­ing Group Pty Ltd [2025] NSWSC 1306 con­firms that builders and nom­i­nat­ed super­vi­sors can be held ful­ly liable for build­ing defects under sec­tion 37 of the Design and Build­ing Prac­ti­tion­ers Act 2020 (NSW), even where oth­er pro­fes­sion­als, such as engi­neers, archi­tects or cer­ti­fiers, also con­tributed to the defects…

Tem­po­rary Dis­con­for­mi­ty in Build­ing Defects: Myth, Not Law

The ​“tem­po­rary dis­con­for­mi­ty” argu­ment in con­struc­tion dis­putes sug­gests that defec­tive work iden­ti­fied before prac­ti­cal com­ple­tion is not a breach while the builder retains a con­trac­tu­al right to rec­ti­fy. NSW courts have con­sis­tent­ly reject­ed this propo­si­tion, con­firm­ing that defec­tive work con­sti­tutes a breach at the time it is performed.The notion of ​“tem­po­rary dis­con­for­mi­ty” is some­times…

Get in touch

If you have any queries about a legal issue or wish to talk to someone about a legal matter please get in touch and we'll contact you promptly.

*Mandatory information