Justice Christine Adamson

An appeals court has reversed a decision awarding $2.1 million to Calibre, the builder of the 'Sky Gardens' residential development in Ryde, finding developer Kalorizkio had validly offset the claim.

A Sydney builder has lost its challenge to a $453,000 judgment for a developer, with an appeals court finding the construction company claimed payment for a greater amount of work than was done on a project in Dural. 

In the final chapter of a years-long fight, an appeals court has ordered a NSW prefab home builder to pay almost $500,000 in damages after finding it engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct to convince a couple to vary their contract to allow the use of cladding they had previously rejected.

The NSW tax office has succeeded on appeal in its fight with Uber over five years of payroll tax totalling more than $81 million, with an appeals court finding that payments made to drivers are taxable.

The NSW Independent Planning Commission failed to consider the local impact of climate change when approving the expansion and extension of MACH Energy’s Mount Pleasant coal mine, an appeals court has ruled.

A court has found a NSW prefab home builder that convinced a couple to vary their contract to allow different cladding which did not have the same aesthetic effect as their preferred one engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct.

Developer VSD Investments has failed in its novel argument for keeping Builtcom from the proceeds of a successful $8.5 million payment claim for work on a Sydney project.

An appeals court has rejected Dexus' challenge to a finding that it must sell its 50 per cent stake in Sydney’s largest suburban shopping centre to Macquarie Retail, saying its arguments contradicted the “evident commercial purpose” of the contracts at issue.

A Dexus property fund has argued that a judge went the “wrong way” in deciding that it was forced to sell its 50 per cent stake in Sydney’s largest suburban shopping centre to Macquarie Retail. 

An appeals court has tossed a challenge to a judge's decision that found a property developer was required to return a $1.3 million loan, despite finding the judge erred in holding enforceable an agreement reached over email.