Dutton and Anor v Smith [2012] QCAT 572
CITATION: Dutton and Anor v Smith [2012] QCAT 572
PARTIES: Marcus Daniel Dutton
Samantha Kaye Martin
(Applicants/Appellants)
v
Huia Karaitiana Smith
(Respondent)
APPLICATION NUMBER: BDL278-11
MATTER TYPE: Building matters
HEARING DATE: 16 November 2012
HEARD AT: Mackay
DECISION OF: Michelle Howard, Member
DELIVERED ON: 16 November, 2012
DELIVERED AT: Mackay
ORDERS MADE: 1. The application is dismissed.
CATCHWORDS: BUILDING CONTRACT – where homeowners
failed to attend hearing – where notice of
hearing given – where evidence that work and
rectification attended to
Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal
Act 2009, s 93
APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):
APPLICANT: There was no appearance for the applicants
RESPONDENT: Mr Huia Karaitiana Smith appeared on his own
behalf
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] Mr Dutton and Ms Martin (the homeowners) filed an application seeking
damages, interest and costs arising out of a building contract with Mr
Smith. Mr Smith filed a response seeking the dismissal of the application.
At a compulsory conference in February 2012, the issues between the
parties were narrowed.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
[2] The claim relates in essence to claimed damage to tiles around a
swimming pool from cleaning agents used when Mr Smith installed
exposed aggregate concrete around the pool. Initially the claim was for
some $46,630. However, it appears from documents provided to the
Tribunal subsequently by Mr Dutton and Ms Martin that the claim was
reduced to $4,730, being the amount specified in an email quote to do
certain work around the pool area. The homeowners have not filed
witness statements setting out their evidence despite numerous directions
from the Tribunal to do so,1 although they filed copies of some documents,
including a Queensland Building Services Authority (BSA) report and
correspondence.
[3] Neither Mr Dutton nor Ms Martin attended the hearing. A notice of hearing
was sent on 3 September 2012 to their nominated address as set out on
their application. Also, directions issued by the Tribunal on 13 June 2012
and 20 July 2012 both included directions that the application was listed
for hearing in Mackay at 9.30am on 16 November, 2012. On this basis,
I am satisfied that Mr Dutton and Ms Martin had notice of the hearing.
I decided to hear and decide the proceeding in their absence.2
[4] At the hearing, Mr Smith, in accordance with his filed response document,
sought orders dismissing the application. He told the Tribunal that he had
completed the work. He has also done some further work after Mr Dutton
and Ms Martin had involved the BSA. Mr Smith said that the BSA had
‘ticked’ off on it as far as possible. His evidence was that the work was
done to a satisfactory manner. He suggested that a couple of issues
remained for the homeowners but that they were not his fault.
[5] It is not known why the homeowners failed to attend the hearing to present
their case. As they did not do so, they may now be satisfied that the
issues they raised have been dealt with. In any event, on the basis of the
evidence given by Mr Smith, and in the absence of any evidence from the
homeowners to the contrary, I accept that the work has been satisfactorily
completed. Therefore, no damages are payable arising out of the
agreement between the parties.
[6] Accordingly, the application is dismissed.
1 Directions dated 23 May 2012; 13 June 2012; and 20 July 2012.
2 As provided for in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009, section
93.
-- 2 of 2 --
Official source: https://www.sclqld.org.au/caselaw/QCAT/2012/572