Kunz v Greenhill Timber Pty Ltd (Civil Claims) [2015] VCAT 1285
Mr. Leslaw Kunz (Applicant/Plaintiff) has a property which was under renovation since June 2013 which required removal of some of the existing flooring. The re-stumpers did not replace the existing flooring. He called Mr. Wladyslaw Rybak(a friend) trading as Rybak Services (Third Respondent) to help dispatch the floor. The plaintiff paid his comrade’s transport costs but not for the help. Mr. Josef Peter Garbiec (Second Respondent) trading as Multi Design Floors heard about the restorations and that the owner wants to install polished timber floorboards, so he contacted the plaintiff. Inspection and measurement of the property was done and he gave a quote for Mr. Kunz. Both parties
…show more content…
Garbiec had consistently repudiated responsibility for the condition of Applicant’s floor. His evidence was that he has been laying floorboards for about 12 years and he always assured that then moisture condition is checked before the work starts. In this instance the second respondent said he asked applicant about the state of the under floor and was assured that everything had been done to remove dampness. He admitted that he did not check the moisture content of the chipboard, the existing floorboards or the new floorboards before commencing laying the timber flooring. The ATFA report stipulated that it is mandatory to investigate whether the site or materials that will be used for service prior any work to have an outcome that is acceptable to or within the standards and problems could be avoided. Despite of the knowledge that the house was at the beach and near the bay, he forgot to inspect the moisture …show more content…
Garbiec at his own expense to repair and/or replace the polished timber floor supplied in accordance with the requirements of the expert report of ATFA no later than 10 October 2015. He was also obliged to pay to the applicant damages in the sum of $1092.78. Under section 109 (3) (c) of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998(Vic) (Austl.), he has to reimburse the fee for the expert report from ATFA, MRST and business names search fee, for a total of $910. Under section115 B (1) of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 (Vic) (Austl.), the Tribunal ordered to reimburse to the applicant the application fee of $158.90. The court added that if Mr. Garbiec repair/replacement is not done at the given due time or it is unsatisfactorily done basing from the STFA standards, the plaintiff shall apply for
Company Overview – Caterpillar Tractor Co. was founded in 1925 and was the product of a merger between The Holt Manufacturing Company, owned by BBB HHH, and C.L Best Tractor Co., owned by DDD BBB. The company had a great demand in WWI and this lead to the first foreign operation of many to come in the future.
This case study examines various real estate contracts – the Real Estate Purchase Contract (REPC) and two addendums labeled Addendum No. 1 and Addendum No. 2 – pertaining to the sale of 1234 Cul-de-sac Lane in Orem, Utah. The buyers in this contract are 17 year old Jon D’Man and 21 year old Marsha Mello; the seller is Boren T. Deal. The first contract created was Jon and Marsha’s offer to purchase Boren’s house. This contract was created using the RESC form, which was likely provided by their real estate agent as it is the required form for real estate transactions according to Utah state law. The seller originally listed the house on a Multiple Listing Service (MLS); Jon and Marsha agreed that the asking price was too high for the neighborhood (although we are not given the actual listing price), and agreed to offer two-hundred and seven-thousand dollars ($207,000) and an Earnest Money Deposit of five-thousand dollars ($5,000). Additionally, the buyers requested that the seller pay 3% which includes the title insurance and property taxes. After the REPC form was drafted, the two addendums were created. Addendum No. 1 is from the seller back to the buyer, and Addendum No. 2 is the buyer’s counteroffer to the seller.
Based on the textbook and my understanding, whenever there are negotiations between a procurer and a supplier regarding a competitive bidding, the first thing that might be favored is the scope of the project, meaning both will sit down and discuss the entire project prior the work begins. Meanwhile, during the negotiations, evaluation criteria should be clear, and stated and defined. As the evaluation is based on the criteria stated and the procurer can request or ask the supplier’s opinions on certain specifications and where things can be improved.
Lumber companies such as Rough and Ready Lumber Co. and The Swanson group have been providing jobs for the last several Decades. Specifically, Rough and Ready Lumber Co. began in 1922 in Cave Junction Oregon by the Krauss brothers, additionally, the Swanson Group was founded in 1951 in Glendale Oregon. In brief, these lumber companies create direct and indirect jobs for thousands of citizens in the surrounding areas of their locations. While there is a natural need for the product these companies provide, there have been several barriers preventing logging, which is necessary to keep business doors open.
Ron Engineering & Construction Eastern Ltd. v. The Queen in Right of Ontario et al. 24 O.R. (2d) 332,
The topic that we have been given for this assessment is a quite broad subject, because of this I am going to be narrowing this down to the ideas that Kurt Hahn and Sir James Darling brought forth to Geelong Grammar School Timbertop and how throughout the history of the Schools Campus the changes that have happened to the Outdoor and Experiential learning side. The thinking behind my decision to reduce the subject down to one single stream was to express my own op
Equuscorp launched proceedings in the Supreme Court of Victoria against each of the respondents. Equuscorp’s claims were for “loss and damage” for breach of the loan agreements and for money had and received. The trial judge dismissed Equuscorp’s contractual claim in all eight cases and upheld the restitution claim in two cases. The respondents appealed this decision in the Supreme Court of Victoria’s Court of Appeal. In this appeal, the majority held that the trial judge erred and that Equuscorp was not entitled to restitution. Equuscorp appealed against the decision of the Court of Appeal in relation to the three respondents. Its grounds for appeal included that the Court of Appeal erred in deciding: a) that Equuscorp was not entitled to restitution for the unenforceable loan agreements; b) that it was not unjust for the respondents to keep the amounts pursuant to the unenforceable loan agreements; and c) that restitution was not assigned as a right or remedy to recover the amounts under the unenforceable loan agreements.
Miller fell down the stairs he hopped back up stairs to have his neighbor, Brooke Thomas, take him to the hospital where he received his medical report. When Mr. miller talked to his landlord, Charlotte Smith, who was sympathetic, but denied any responsibility for Mr. Miller’s injuries. When he contacted his insurance agency they would not pay for his visit to the emergency room, or his physical therapy. Due to his absence from work he needed to take out a loan for four hundred dollars at six percent interest in order to cover his rent. He is now looking for compensation for his missed, loaned money used to pay rent, the expenses for his medical bills not covered by insurance, and steps toward proper safety measures to be installed in the stairwell. (Client
At the behest of Solicitor General John Les, an inquiry was launched in February o...
According to CPSC (2010), On May 2010, a recall was initiated for 1.8 million Auto Fire Target Sets due to children swallowing the 1 inch dart, causing asphyxiation and eventually death to three children. However, the toy was not initiated to be recalled by the person responsible, Henry Gordy International Inc. but from Family Dollar Stores, Inc. and from U.S Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The toy dart guns was imported from China by Henry Gordy International Inc., of Plainfield, NJ, which were sold exclusively at Family Dollar stores nationwide from September 2005 through January 2009 for about $1.50.
The U.S. paint industry is very large and competition among the coating company is quite intense. Jones Blair Company markets its paint and sundry items in over 50 countries and in order to know which the customers of Jones Blair Company are, we have to break down and build up the potential buyers into groups to structure the market.
supplied on the audit documents. The decision I chose may cost Baker Greenleaf to lose an
Preparation for the negotiation took around forty minutes. The contract was breached by us (Wood Crafters) and there was no supporting document. Our options were bankruptcy or selling the house. The opening offer was made by Viking. Wood Crafters could see that Viking felt that they had the power/rights which led to the distributive approach. Initially, Viking was pushing for Wood Crafters to pay the over-run, the loan and the rent but Wood Crafters pushed against it. Wood Crafters argument was that the over-run project was approved by Viking secretary, therefore, Wood Crafters offer was to file a bankruptcy which believed to be the best option at the time. By filing a bankruptcy, Viking would not be
MEMO RE CLARKSON LUMBER TO: John Doe President, Northrup National Bank FROM: George Dodge Loans Officer, Northrup National Bank Clarkson Lumber Company is owned and operated by the hardworking, 49-year-old Mr. Clarkson. It has low operating expenses, a small staff, and strong management. The overall impression is one of a conservative, efficient operation. Clarkson himself leads a frugal lifestyle with little personal debt. Clarkson Lumber is a company experiencing rapid growth but with a constant cash flow crisis.
WOODSIDE PETROLEUM is the most wanted and Australian petroleum exploration and production company. Woodside has the largest operator of oil and gas production in Australia and also Australia’s largest independent dedicated oil and gas company.] It is a public company listed on the Australian Securities Exchange and has its headquarters in Perth, Western Australia Woodside Petroleum Limited (WPL) is an independent oil and gas company with a portfolio of liquefied natural gas trains, offshore platforms, oil floating production storage and off-loading vessels. WPL produces and sells LNG, pipeline gas, oil condensate and LPG, with ITS landmark Australian project being the North West Shelf. WPL also holds interests in operating assets located in Australia and overseas.