ContractsProf Blog

Editor: Myanna Dellinger
University of South Dakota School of Law

Friday, April 3, 2009

Peevyhouse and John Wunder Down Under

Bbb This week I'm teaching those two student rabble-rousers, Peevyhouse v. Garland Coal Co. and Groves v. John Wunder Co.  The issue in both cases, of course, is whether the owner of property can get the cost of rectifying the defective performance if that cost exceeds the actual economic loss it suffered.  The Australian High Court has recently dealt with the same issue, and it comes down on the John Wonder side of the coin.

In the case, Tabcorp Holdings Ltd v Bowen Investments Pty Ltd [2009] HCA 8, the Court held that a building tenant had a right to have a building's lobby restored to its original condition at a cost of A$1.38 million, even though the actual loss in building value from the defective performance was only A$38,000.  Nick Christopoulos and Jack Fan of Clayton Utz offer a summary of the case here.  (Free registration required.)

[Frank Snyder]

Recent Cases | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Peevyhouse and John Wunder Down Under:


Isn't this called economic waste?

Posted by: Gavin Craig | Apr 3, 2009 11:52:58 AM

Post a comment

If you do not complete your comment within 15 minutes, it will be lost. For longer comments, you may want to draft them in Word or another program and then copy them into this comment box.