Renovations can be a stressful and complex process, particularly when disputes arise between parties involved. A recent case from Anjoul v Anjoul highlights the importance of complying with statutory requirements, such as the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW), and keeping records in writing to avoid future disagreements. In this article, we will examine the key lessons from this case and provide guidance for homeowners who are planning renovations.

Building your dream home is a significant investment, and you want to ensure that the construction is of the highest quality. However, even with the best intentions and expert builders, construction defects can arise, and it is crucial to know your rights and options as a homeowner. This article will provide guidance and lessons learned from the recent case of RBV Builders Pty Ltd v. Chedra to help homeowners protect their homes from construction defects.

Owning a home is an Australian dream, but what happens when that dream turns into a nightmare due to defects in your property? The recent case of Stevenson v Ashton provides clarity on what constitutes a ‘major defect’ under the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) (HBA). This article aims to help homeowners in NSW understand the implications of the case and what they should look out for when assessing their own property for defects.

Construction disputes can be stressful for homeowners. The recent Oikos Constructions Pty Ltd v Ostin case underscores the importance of understanding a contractor’s obligations and statutory warranties under the Home Building Act 1989. This article will provide legal guidance for NSW homeowners facing construction disputes, including how to protect their interests.

As a homeowner in New South Wales, it is important to understand your rights and obligations under the law. In the case of Murphy v Zubkrycki & Anor [2020] NSWDC 538, the court considered the rights of a homeowner who had purchased a property with a retaining wall that collapsed. This article aims to provide guidance to homeowners who may be facing similar issues.

Homeowners often encounter issues in construction contracting, and the recent case of Day v Quince’s Quality Building Services provides valuable lessons to those who may be facing similar problems. In this case, the owners sought the assistance of the New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) after a dispute with their builder, but the matter ultimately proceeded to appeal. This article discusses the key issues in the case and provides practical advice for homeowners on how to protect their interests in construction contracting.

A recent case, James v Jandson Pty Ltd [2021] NSWCA 151, provides valuable insights into how statutory limitation periods work in building contracts. The case involved a homeowner who claimed that the builder breached the statutory warranties under the Home Building Act (HBA) due to water penetration in various locations. The homeowner commenced legal proceedings, claiming that the works were defective and that the builder’s letter constituted a separate contract.

Building or renovating your home is a significant investment, and it is crucial to ensure that your building contract meets your expectations. Unfortunately, there are times when a building contract does not go according to plan and the parties face disputes over the work’s quality, timeframe, and cost. This article provides guidance to homeowners who may be facing similar factual issues to the owner in the Howell v Talevski case and offers advice on how to ensure their building contract works for them.