Longer opt-in period for leaky building class action

The Court of Appeal has allowed a representative class action against James Hardie New Zealand, for inherent defects in its ‘Harditex’ and ‘Titan Board’ cladding systems that allegedly contributed to a large number of leaky homes. The class action alleges that James Hardie was both negligent in its manufacture of the cladding systems, and breached…

James Hardie Representative Action Begins

James Hardie is an international building materials company, specialising in the manufacture of ‘Harditex’, ‘Titan board’ and ‘Monotek’ building cladding products used in the construction of several thousand New Zealand homes and buildings throughout the 1990’s and 2000’s. They are known to be a sophisticated company with a long history of litigation relating to asbestos-related…

Rise of the class action

Last week the media reported that an additional class action against James Hardie (regarding its Harditex cladding system) was gathering momentum. If pursued this will add to the existing  $100 million class action claim that was raised against James Hardie earlier in the year (also in relation to this cladding system). If these claims proceed to…

Leaky apartment owners face multiple rounds of repairs

Last Thursday was the inaugural meeting of the Auckland branch of the Body Corporate Chairs’ Group, a group formed to assist those owners administering thousands of units across the city (to read more about the group, click here). According to Chairwoman Lyn Gillingham,  leaky apartments were a main topic of discussion, with many owners undertaking further repair…

Producer statements and liability to subsequent purchasers

A case recently heard at the High Court of Auckland, Judge v Dempsey [2014] NZHC 2864, highlights that parties issuing Producer Statements in relation to building work may find themselves liable to a subsequent purchaser of the building for latent defects. The judgment, released 18 November, echoes the sentiment seen in 2012 Supreme Court case…

Update on Christchurch’s solution to flooding

Further to our blog post on 14 July regarding Christchurch City Council’s plan to apply a waterproof membrane to houses affected by flooding (read our blog post here), use of the membrane has been described as a success, with reports that it may now be used as a solution to Auckland’s leaky building problem. The…

Supreme Court clarification: ‘built’ = ‘building work’

The Supreme Court has released its judgment on appeal finding that the meaning of ‘built’ in section 14(a) of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 (WHRSA) is aligned with the meaning behind section 393 of the Building Act 2006 relating to ‘building work’. Section 14(a) of the WHRSA acts as a limitation provision and…