On 17 July I was a guest on The Resident Builder Podcast with Peter Wolfkamp on Newstalk ZB. We touched on the plasterboard shortage and other building supply issues.

On this week's edition of The Resident Builder podcast, building disputes expert, Mike Thornton joined Peter Wolfkamp.

Homeowners with an earthquake damaged house had to pay wasted costs for two cancelled court events because their expert’s report was late: Alexander v Southern Response Earthquake Services Ltd [2020] NZHC 1660 [10 July 2020].

The High Court has held (Singh v Boutique Body Corporate Limited [2019] NZHC 1707 19/07/19) that members of a body corporate committee owe no duty to a member disgruntled at paying levies to repair weathertightness issues. 

The High Court held a dispute resolution clause in a homeowners’ contract with their builder to build their house did not prevent them cancelling the contract when the builder left site due to non-payment of invoices.

Finds a wide variation in the standard of reporting, and calls for a licensing scheme. MBIE has shown no interest in reform so far.

The recent High Court decision holding Hawkins Construction liable to pay $13.4m plus GST to repair a leaky school[1] has been in the news, probably because of the size of the judgment (though it's not the biggest leaky building judgment) and that it is a school with a role of nearly 2000.

Can you sue the person who sells you their leaky house because before you bought they told you it wasn’t? The answer is: no, though it may depend on what court you end up in.

The High Court said yes: Mason v Magee [2017] NZHC 51.

The Court of Appeal said no: Magee v Mason [2017] NZCA 502

A recent High Court decision has confirmed that the ownership of an apartment as part of a unit title is not “all for one, one for all” when it comes to decision making.  The wishes of the majority can override the interests of a minority.