Late last year, the Supreme Court bought some Christmas cheer to the thousands of leaky home owners when it dismissed appeals by North Shore City Council against the decisions in Sunset Terraces/Byron Avenue in the High Court and Court of Appeal. 

The Department of Building and Housing recently provided additional information about the proposed government assistance package for leaky home owners (see attached). While the scheme will not be finalised until 2011, the announcement does clarify certain aspects of the scheme which impacts upon eligibility for it.

The Court of Appeal has emphatically rejected an attempt by territorial authorities to limit or reduce their ongoing exposure to leaky building claims. 

In the leaky building context, the personal liability of directors of development companies, continues to generate much jurisprudence.  A recent decision of Heath J held that where a director is found to have assumed responsibly for the way in which work is carried out on a building project and defects result, personal liability will likely follow.

The Sunset trial was lengthy, taking nearly six weeks of court time. The body corporate and four of the 17 individual home owners were successful. While the case was not a “win” overall for all of the home owners, it was a good outcome for other leaky home owners (PDF)

Civil litigators, in the Auckland High Court at least, will know of many leaky building cases dealing with multi-unit developments, a fact attested to by the frequent appearance of such proceedings in the daily Court list.  Such proceedings are a natural by-product of the leaky building phenomenon and, like most litigation, usually settle before trial.

In my earlier article in June 2007 I examined recent decisions at adjudications in the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service and in the High Court involving the potential liability of directors of development companies in the leaky building context.

In casting the net wide to include all potentially liable parties, owners of leaky buildings have frequently sued directors of companies associated with the development of leaky buildings. In the recent and well-known decision of Dicks v Hobson Swan Construction Limited (in liquidation) (2006) 7 NZCPR 881, the High Court held a builder personally liable where his company was insolvent, and where he had built the house. (PDF)