Your selected location:
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. HHG Articles
  4. /
  5. Civil Contractors’ Legal Guide: Quality
22 Dec 2017

Standard of Workmanship

Most standard-form contracts provide that a contractor’s works are to be carried out in a “proper and workmanlike manner”. Different words may be used but the general concept is the same.

Even if the contract does not describe the standard of workmanship, the common law (that is, the law that develops over time through precedents set by the courts) says that this standard of workmanship is implied into every works contract.

Because it is the contract that sets the standard, the law treats work which falls below this standard as a breach of contract.

Your rights if a Subcontractor does defective work

Under the common law, this breach of contract will entitle the contractor’s principal or employer to be compensated for the loss and damage suffered as a result of poor workmanship.

Such loss and damage will usually include one or more of the following:

  1. the cost to engage other contractors to rectify the faulty workmanship;
  2. the delay and disruption costs incurred while the contractor’s principal or employer waits for those defects to be rectified;
  3. if the works are part of a production process (for example, a factory or a power plant), the contractor’s principal or employer may suffer loss of profits while the building cannot be used for its intended purpose; and
  4. if the contractor is engaged in a landmark project or a project that has received a lot of public attention (for example, Elizabeth Quay or the new Burswood Stadium), the contractor’s principal or employer may suffer loss of reputation.

Traditionally, the law only allowed principals to sue for a sum of money to compensate them for the loss and damage caused by a contractor’s poor workmanship.

However, in WA and in some other Australian states, specialist tribunals have been created with the power to order the contractor to go back on site and remedy defects.

Other rights under WA legislation

In WA, the Building Commissioner and the State Administrative Tribunal (“SAT”) share this power.

However, their power to order rectification of building defects is limited.

Who can deal with defect claims?

The Building Commissioner can only order rectification that costs up to $100,000.

The SAT can only order rectification that costs up to $500,000.

If the defects will cost more than $500,000 to rectify, the affected principal or employer must sue for compensation in a court or take the dispute to arbitration (provided that the contract requires or allows arbitration, or the parties agree to refer the dispute to arbitration).

How is compensation for defects worked out?

The amount of compensation is generally either:

  1. the cost to bring the workmanship up to a proper and workmanlike standard; or
  2. the difference between the market value of the works “as is” and the market value the works would have had if they had been done properly; or
  3. in extreme cases, where there is no way to make the defective works fit for their intended purpose, the courts may award an amount in compensation reflecting the cost of demolishing and redoing either the affected part of the works or, if necessary, the whole of the works.

When are experts needed?

Judges and lawyers are not experts in how construction work is done and therefore often need the help of expert witnesses, to explain:

  1. how the works were done;
  2. how the works should have been done and why;
  3. why the works are defective; and
  4. what needs to be done to fix the works and bring them up to the required standard.

These experts may include:

  1. geotechnical engineers;
  2. structural engineers;
  3. mechanical/electrical/hydraulic engineers;
  4. quantity surveyors/estimators;
  5. experienced builders and contractors;
  6. property valuers; and
  7. forensic accountants.

Obtaining and using expert evidence

There are strict rules in relation to the kind of expert evidence a court will consider. For this reason, you should not attempt to brief an expert yourself, without first taking legal advice, even in simple cases.

The other reason to instruct experts through lawyers is that if an expert instructed by a lawyer writes something down that you do not want disclosed or that turns out not to be helpful to your case, then that report is protected from being disclosed to the other side. This is because of a special duty that your lawyer owes to you, called lawyer-client privilege. Privilege is like a bond of secrecy, whereby communications which take place between you and your lawyer and in some cases, your lawyer and third parties on your behalf, are never to be seen by anyone else (including a court or tribunal). You will not have any right of privilege if you instruct an expert directly, rather than through a lawyer.

Time limits for defect claims

Most but not all claims arising from faulty or defective workmanship must be made within a certain period of time. Otherwise, they become barred by statutes of limitation. In most cases, these claims need to be made within six years of the date of practical completion of the works that are said to be defective.

There is one important exception to this rule. That exception specifically concerns latent defects. These are defects that at the time of practical completion and for some time afterwards, are hidden from plain view and only show up later. Common examples include:

  1. excessive settlement of building foundations laid on poorly compacted ground;
  2. more civil-oriented works: eg, incorrect levels, excavation faults, water table engineering;
  3. damage to concrete and other porous structures caused by moisture ingress;
  4. rusting of ungalvanised metal components under the surface of a structure;
  5. slow leakage of chemicals and contaminants from components of mechanical parts; and
  6. termite damage.

Such defects may not show any signs for many years after the works have been practically completed. In these circumstances, the six-year period that the principal has to take legal action for defective workmanship against the contractor may start to run from the time when the defect was or should have become known to the principal.

For example, a principal took legal action about 15 years after the affected structure had reached practical completion in Brookfield Multiplex Ltd (ACN 008687063) v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 61288 [2014] HCA 36.

*This is general information only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. Please consult one of our experienced Legal Team for specific advice relevant to your situation.

Supporting Western Australians for more than 100 years

"Always fast and thorough service. Thank you"


My circumstances at the time I made contact with HHG were dire following my argument being rejected by two no win no fee firms. Following my initial meeting with HHG's employment law team I was left feeling extremely positive by the response and concern shown by HHG in regards to their support of my argument along with their preparedness to pursue an outcome on my behalf.

I accept the fact that nobody really wins in these cases (mental health/ workplace) however the end result was what would be considered most favourable and far in excess of what would have been achieved had I not sought the advice from HHG.

I have no hesitation in recommending HHG to anyone caught up in the messy circumstances I found myself in at the time.

Great advice and five-star commitment to their client!!"


"Thank you for such great assistance with the transaction of Flying Domestics on behalf of Lorna Good. It has been such a pleasure to work with the HHG Legal Group and I look forward to working with you in the future."


"Simon Creek and his team were at all times empathic, professional and confident.  My matter needed to be addressed within a pressing time frame, and their availability at short notice and contact after hours was much appreciated.  It caused me considerable stress, but having such a thoroughly reliable and competent team to call on helped me to feel in control. Although I hope not to need their services again in future, I would be confident in doing so!"


"A good outcome is what we can expect.  A great outcome is a sign of a company which does the very best for their clients. A very big thank you to Daniel Morris for showing empathy towards my small and much needed legal action.

To HHG Legal Group, thank you for a great outcome.  I would recommend your company to anyone seeking legal services."


"Your support this morning was amazingly kind, not to mention your totally reassuring competence, knowledge and wisdom that you used on my behalf.  It was extremely reassuring to have your knowledgeable support, and I particularly appreciated your real and obvious kindness to me. It means so much at a very difficult time. I'm so grateful to you."

Family Law Client

"Janene was very professional and we established a good rapport quickly. The subject of death and wills can be quite confronting to deal with, however, Janene's approach was soft and accommodating."


"A big thank you to HHG for their professional service, continued support, and wide range of legal knowledge. Our clients have given us nothing but kind words regarding HHG Legal Group and so we have no hesitation in referring and recommending Simon Creek and HHG Legal Group for their outstanding services and legal expertise."


"Simon is a friendly and practical legal advisor. I have received great feedback from the clients I have referred to him and his team at HHG Legal Group."


"Over the last few years, I have been impressed by Simon’s legal ability, management skills, entrepreneurial spirit, personal integrity and people skills. He appears to be that rare breed of lawyer – both knowledgeable and commercial."


"Our family has been a client of HHG Legal Group over many years.  Business has included drawing up of wills for three generations and preparing of probate for my father in law. I would have no hesitation in recommending HHG Legal Group to anyone requiring such services."


"You should be congratulated for the manner in which your staff address clients and we found our dealings with your company, once again a very pleasant experience and we would like to truly thank you for your efforts."

Steve and Jane

"HHG Legal were absolutely fantastic. Extremely responsive and brought calm to our chaotic family situation through their knowledge and caring attitude. Extremely professional from our very first contact with them and they expertly guided our family though the required legal process over almost a 12 month period."


"Fantastic team! They really care about their client. Tim Colcutt is a 'go that extra mile' guy who gives his client his all. I can't recommend HHG and Tim enough."


"I had a fantastic lawyer in Matthew Lilly. He helped me out a great deal with good, sound advice in a friendly, professional manner. First class, thanks Matthew"


"Marine Plant Systems has been working with HHG Legal Group for a few years now and they continually provide first-class service. Their professional advice has been invaluable to our company."


"We were kept up to date at all times. Pricing was always updated over the time period so we remained "in budget". Personal access to someone whenever I had questions. All in all a great experience without too much fuss."


"Good service you can count on."


"HHG Legal Group has provided outstanding support as I have taken the journey of buying a business, their professionalism is beyond reproach. Their assistance throughout the Due Diligence process has been invaluable, I would fully recommend them."


"Very friendly and efficient service - what a pleasure working with Matthew."


"I highly recommend Daniel from HHG Lawyer in Mandurah. When dealing with a complicated legal property matter recently I was extremely impressed by Daniel's honesty and integrity and the legal advice I received. I am very happy with the service from HHG Legal."


Select your location:

Please select your nearest office location so we can show you the most relevant information.