10 BROWN STREET CHATSWOOD

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION – design and construct contract between developer and first defendant – plaintiff successor in title to developer – whether first defendant breached statutory warranties under s 18B(a), (b) and (f) of the Home Building Act 1989, as incorporated into the contract – whether facade was designed and constructed in accordance with the “Hyder Specification” as incorporated in the contract – proper construction of the Hyder Specification – whether a reasonable businessperson would construe the Hyder Specification as if the contractor had warranted that the facade would be fully weather tight when tested in accordance with AS 4284 for the building’s entire design life – the extent to which the building has been shown not to be weather tight – whether observational evidence of two lay witnesses demonstrates water ingress in window assemblies beyond those recognised by expert witnesses in joint report – whether first defendant’s failure to conduct prototype testing has any relevant consequence – whether prototype testing conducted on indistinguishable window assemblies at a different site indicates that the building would have passed prototype tests – whether plaintiff’s expert witness’s tests were appropriate to reveal any inadequacy in the design of the facade – whether the first defendant’s proposed remedial work to the facade is necessary and reasonable to compensate the plaintiff – whether replacement of the whole facade is out of all proportion to the benefit that would be obtained – whether plaintiff has established claims in respect to defects associated with mechanical services, bathrooms and ensuites, fire services and general internal defects; BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION – design and construct sub-contract between first and fourth defendants – whether the developer was a “non-contracting owner” vis-à-vis the sub-contract for the purposes of s 18D(1A) of the Home Building Act– whether plaintiff as successor in title to developer entitled to enforce s 18B statutory warranties against the fourth defendant sub-contractor – whether, in any event, the plaintiff’s claim against the fourth defendant is statute barred – the relevant date of completion of the sub-contract under s 3B of the Home Building Act – whether the limitation period applicable to the s 18B warranties has expired; TORTS – strata titles – whether the first and third defendants owed a duty of care to the plaintiff –whether the plaintiff is relevantly vulnerable – whether case can be distinguished from Brookfield Multiplex Limited v Owners – Strata Plan No 61288 [2014] HCA 36 – whether the fact that the plaintiff has the benefit of statutory warranties under the Home Building Act against the first defendant is a reason to deny the existence of a duty of care

BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION - builder's duty to subsequent owner - latent defects in common property - duty to owners' corporation of commercial premises STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - scope of duty of care under common law - responsibility of builder of commercial building - significance of statutory warranties with respect to residential building work TORTS - negligence - claim for pure economic loss - duty of care for latent defects in commercial premises - liability to owners' corporation with respect to common property - vulnerability as necessary element of duty

[PROCEDURE] - civil - whether court should order the separate and prior determination of the question of the existence of a duty of care - all relevant factual material before the court. [BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION] - strata titles - whether defendants owed a common law duty of care - whether duty of care alleged is inconsistent with principle - whether appropriate for a trial judge to determine a common law duty of care owed to an owners corporation - whether decision in Bryan v Maloney (1995) 182 CLR 609 is authority for the existence of a duty of care.