CONTRIBUTOR
ARTICLE
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Limitations and time bars abound in construction arrangements. The application of the 'ultimate limitation period' of ten years has recently expanded, but a lot of work done before 1 August 2008 will still slip through the cracks.

Contractor claims are often expressly barred unless they are made within a specified period and defects must be notified within 3, 6 or 12‑months, depending on the contract. The Home Building Act 1989 requires builders to give statutory warranties for seven years, but limits home warranty insurance indemnity to two years for non‑structural and six years for structural issues. The Limitations Act 1969 bars claims six years after the 'cause of action accrues'.

Despite the raft of bars and limitations, claims relating to building issues, brought many years after the structure is occupied, remain common place.

Building claims based on breach of a duty of care are subject to a six year limitation period, but the six year period does not commence to run until the defect becomes apparent (unless expressly prohibited under the contract). A fundamental defect may take years or even decades to reveal itself.

Section 109ZK of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act attempted to manage this long tail of construction liability by barring claims made more than 10 years after the date on which the final occupation certificate was issued. The difficulty is that history has recorded many instances where an occupation certificate has never been issued. If there is no occupation certificate, there is no 10 year 'ultimate limitation period'.

On 1 August 2008, s109ZK was amended to provide that where no occupation certificate has been issued, a building action may not be brought more than 10 years after:

  • the last date the building work was inspected by a certifying authority; or
  • if no such inspection has been conducted, the date on which that part of the building, where the building work was carried out, is first occupied or used.

The change to the application of the 'ultimate limitation period' was made to ensure that the period during which an action for loss or damage may be brought in relation to defective building work is consistent with the period for which accredited certifiers are required to be covered by insurance under the Building Professionals Act 2005.

For reasons apparently only known to the New South Wales Government, the change does not apply to building work commenced before 1 August 2008. If the building work was commenced before that date and there is no occupation certificate issued, there will be no 'ultimate limitation period' and exposure to potential claims can, in theory, last for forever.

Sydney

   

Robert Riddell

t (02) 9931 4940

e rriddell@nsw.gadens.com.au

Scott Laycock

t (02) 9931 4865

e slaycock@nsw.gadens.com.au

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration from Australia
Justice Lee's judgment a reminder to the profession of the importance of the Harman undertaking in all areas of litigation
Carroll & O'Dea
Anyone engaging in court proceedings should be aware of the Harman undertaking & its applicability to documents in proceedings.
Why can't I serve a subpoena on Centrelink and the Australian Taxation Office?
Carroll & O'Dea
While subpoenas are a good tool to direct the production of documents, there are limits on the power of a subpoena.
Our opinion on the Bruce Lehrmann defamation case
O'Brien Criminal & Civil Solicitors
Defamation proceedings may result in the further destruction of the reputations that they are attempting to salvage.
Case summary – Legal professional privilege - Ghorbanzadeh v Western Sydney Local Health District [2023] NSWSC 1330
Carroll & O'Dea
Written material by an expert in preparation for a verbal opinion may need to be disclosed in subsequent court proceedings.
NSW Supreme Court ruling highlights difficulty in relying on limitations defence
Holman Webb
An example of how difficult it can be to successfully rely on a limitations defence, particularly at an interlocutory stage.
Defence of justification (truth) in defamation in Australia
Stonegate Legal
The defence of justification has shifted towards a requirement that the imputations are "substantially true".
FREE News Alerts
Sign Up for our free News Alerts - All the latest articles on your chosen topics condensed into a free bi-weekly email.
Upcoming Events
Mondaq Social Media