Australia: Builders’ duty of care to subsequent owners – re-opening the door

Last Updated: 21 November 2013
Article by Stephen Pyman and Joshua Kemp

Most Read Contributor in Australia, September 2016

The NSW Court of Appeal recently held that a builder was liable in negligence to a body corporate of commercial premises for defects which posed a risk to health and safety, despite there being no contractual relationship between the body corporate and the builder and the body corporate not being in existence at the time of construction.


The Chelsea Apartments at Chatswood comprise 9 floors of serviced apartments and 12 floors of residential apartments ('development').

Multiplex was engaged to design and construct the development.  The developer had also entered an agreement with three separate Stockland entities under which the serviced apartments could be sold to investors by Stockland, which continued to manage the serviced apartment business.

The development comprised a separate body corporate for the served apartments ('Owners' Corporation') from the rest of the development.

Numerous defects became apparent to the Owners Corporation, and it brought proceedings against Multiplex. As the Owners' Corporation did not have any contract with Multiplex, the proceedings were based in negligence and the claim was for pure economic, being the cost of rectification of defects. The defects were not from design but from faulty workmanship and materials not in accordance with the plans and specifications. 

The Owners' Corporation conceded that it was not entitled to the benefit of statutory warranties under the Home Building Act (HBA) due to the exclusion of serviced apartments from the definition of 'dwelling'.

Decision of McDougall J at first instance

At first instance in Owners Corporation Strata Plan 61288 v Brookfield Multiplex [2012] NSWSC 1219 ('Brookfield No. 2'), Justice McDougall of the NSW Supreme Court determined the existence of a duty of care as a preliminary question.

In considering the issue, McDougall J explained that the statutory warranty scheme under the HBA excluded buildings which were always intended to be used for commercial purposes. His Honour reasoned that the Owners' Corporation was therefore "inviting the courts to go where the legislature did not".

McDougall J observed that the exclusion of dwellings used for commercial purposes (including overnight accommodation) from the HBA represented a "considered decision by the legislature that the benefits of the regime established by the HBA should not be extended to those who construct, for commercial rather than purely residential purposes".

Accordingly, His Honour rejected that a common law duty of care should be imposed primarily because the legislature "appears to have withheld as a matter of deliberate policy choice". McDougall J decided that it was therefore not necessary to consider the concept of vulnerability.

Court of Appeal decision

The New South Wales Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by the Owners' Corporation.

Analysis of authorities

Basten JA gave the primary judgment of the Court, which reviewed the development of the law in relation to liability for pure economic loss, stemming from Caltex Oil (Australia) Pty Ltd v The Dredge "Willemstad" [1976] [HCA 65]; Perre v Apand Pty Ltd [1999] [HCA 36] and Bryan v Maloney [1995] HCA 17.

His Honour recognised the importance of 'vulnerability' as a key factor in identifying the scope of a duty of care for pure economic loss (as set out by the High Court in Perre v Apand) and noted the comments of McHugh J that "the vulnerability of the plaintiff to harm from the defendant's conduct is therefore ordinarily a prerequisite to imposing a duty".

His Honour stated that "the inability of a Plaintiff to protect itself is an element of vulnerability" and more specifically that 'vulnerability' may have three (3) aspects, namely the inability to:

  • control or influence the physical event which gave rise to the loss
  • negotiate a contractual arrangement imposing liability on the Defendant
  • obtain insurance against the economic loss suffered

Other factors at stake in consideration of the existence of a duty of care are:

  • the concept of "disproportion between the nature of the conduct and the culpability of the Defendant"
  • the need to avoid the imposition of liability for "ordinary business conduct"

Basten JA also noted that Perre v Apand reflected the abandonment of the concept of 'proximity' as a "touchstone of the existence of a duty of care".  However his Honour noted that the factors which were apt to be included in such an exercise remain relevant. 

In considering the significance of Bryan v Maloney, it was noted by Basten JA that the majority reasoning for finding a duty of care in that case involved the following factors:

1.  An element of known reliance (or dependence) or the assumption of responsibility or a combination of the two (referred to by their Honours in Bryan v Maloney as a "special" relationship).

2. Recognition that the existence of a contractual relationship as between the builder and the original owner did not preclude the existence of a duty of care for the purposes of negligence.

3.  Recognition that the duty of care extended to 'economic' loss suffered by the original owner.

4. That the plaintiff was a subsequent owner of the land was not a critical factor militating against the continued operation of the duty.

Basten JA noted that two (2) factors had changed since Bryan v Maloney, namely:

  • the High Court's abandonment of the concept of 'proximity' as the critical test or 'conceptual determinant' in identifying the existence of a duty with respect to economic loss
  • the dismissal of the proposition that there is "a bright line between cases concerning the construction of dwellings and cases concerning the construction of other buildings".

In relation to the latter factor, his Honour noted that the plaintiff in Woolcock Street failed because it did not bring itself within the principles established in Bryan v Maloney, not because the building was a commercial building.

According to the Basten JA, the salient features in Brookfield No. 2 were the following:

  1. The contractual relationship between the developer and the builder.
    The builder was fully aware of the arrangements between the developer and Stockland and was responsible for ensuring the registration of the relevant strata plan. The builder was also aware of the contractual arrangements by which apartments were sold.  Therefore, the class of persons to which the builder may be liable was 'determinate'.

  2. The contractual relationship between the developer and the entity managing the serviced apartments.
    At registration of the strata plan the developer controlled the Owners' Corporation and was in a position to impose obligations on the Owners' Corporation, as vendor of the properties.  The contractual arrangements between the developer and the builder and between the purchasers and the developer contained no provisions dealing with latent defects or provisions limiting liability with respect to latent defects.

  3. The statutory scheme with respect to strata plans.
    The provisions of the Strata Schemes Management Act vested the common property in the Owners' Corporation at registration of the strata plan and invested "principal responsibility for the management of the scheme in the Owners' Corporation".  One of the key functions of the Owners' Corporation was to "maintain and repair the common property of the strata scheme"

  4. The statutory scheme for protection of successive owners of residential dwellings. 
    The statutory protections available to subsequent owners of residential buildings, did not apply to the Owners' Corporation due to the use of the service apartments as tourist, holiday or overnight accommodation.

Errors by primary judge

The Court of Appeal unanimously held (relevantly) that:

  1. It was wrong to conclude that the parties' obligations having been dealt with in detail in the contract, precluded a finding that a tortious duty existed with respect to defects.
    Basten JA noted that the contract did not "purport expressly, or by necessary implication, to exclude any liability for defects or omissions which might arise otherwise than during that period, whether under contract or under the general law".
    The builder owed a duty of care to the developer, notwithstanding the superintendent's role, as the builder contracted to build in accordance with the plans and specifications and it is not reasonable, and cost prohibitive for the developer to check every detail of the work.
  2. There was no basis to not impose a duty of care on the ground that such a duty affected the 'commercial basis' upon which the builder priced its work.
  3. There was no basis to imply that the legislature intended, in enacting the Home Building Regulation, to exclude a common law duty of care outside of the regime of protection given in the HBA to owners of "dwellings".
  4. Purchasers of the units were vulnerable because they could have insisted upon a contractual right as against the builder or the developer.  They were also in a weaker position than the developer regarding inspections for defects or preventing latent defects.

The Owners' Corporation was in a weaker position than that of the developer and purchasers, which may have had some opportunity to carry out inspections during the course of the construction.

Scope of the duty of care to avoid pure economic loss

The Court of Appeal endorsed the view adopted by La Forest J in Winnipeg Condominium Corporation No 36 v Bird Construction Co Ltd [1995] [1 SCER 85] that once the liability of a builder for physical damage to persons or property is recognised, it is appropriate to accept liability for economic loss, being the cost of steps reasonably taken to mitigate the risk of physical damage or personal injury. 

Importantly, the scope of the duty of care imposed by the Court of Appeal was limited to latent defects which were either:

  • structural in nature
  • required urgent attention
  • constituted a danger to persons or property in, or in the vicinity of, the served apartments
  • made the apartments uninhabitable

The Court of Appeal decision once again confirmed the importance of the concept of 'vulnerability' as a requirement to establish the existence of a duty of care to a subsequent purchaser to avoid pure economic loss. Despite this, any other "salient features" of the case must be considered.

In the context of a strata title development, the ability of the Owners Corporation' or body corporate to protect itself against the harm of the defendant's conduct is typically limited due to creation of the Owners' Corporation or body corporate on registration of the strata plan and there being no ability to discover latent defects or to obtain contractual protection against the developer and/ or builder prior to creation.

The failure by purchasers to obtain contractual protection will not preclude a finding of vulnerability on behalf of the Owners' Corporation or body corporate, at least in circumstances where the sale contracts were agreed between the builder and the developer and where the builder retains a right to approve any changes to the terms of the sale contracts.

What does this mean for builders?

Multiplex has filed an application in the High Court for special leave to appeal the NSW Court of Appeal's decision.

Until the special leave application has been granted and a High Court judgment handed down, it remains unclear if this decision will apply outside NSW or how residential warranty legislation in other States will impact on the application of a duty of care on builders in other States.

However, it is now clear from the Court of Appeal decision that the non- application of the statutory warranties under the HBA in favour of a subsequent purchaser will not necessarily preclude the imposition of a common law duty of care. It remains to be seen whether a duty of care will be imposed in favour of a subsequent purchaser of a residential building to which the statutory warranties do apply.

The Court of Appeal recognised that the question of a duty of care to the subsequent owner does not arise unless it has already been established that the developer was owed such a duty. Therefore, builders should consider seeking an express limitation (either wholly or in part) of liability in tort as against the developer, with respect to defects which might arise outside of the contractual defects liability period.

If not limited, builders should be aware of potential liability for certain latent defects and obtain advice from their insurance broker as to the availability of cover against such liability.

Each case will depend on its facts, the contract, vulnerability and the salient features. If you are subject to a claim or the expense of latent defects, you should seek advice on each set of the particular circumstances.

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.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Mondaq Advice Centre (MACs)
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.