Contractor Entitled to Payment for Substantially Completed Work
📌 In brief
The Tribunal Member decided that the contractor was entitled to payment for substantially completed work, minus deductions for proven deficiencies. The contractor proved that the work was mostly complete, while the customer showed that some parts were not up to standard.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant's invoice was accepted with deductions for deficient work.
📚 Full judgment
The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The contractor provided photographs showing the substantially completed work, which was accepted as proof of completion.
- The customer did not provide expert evidence to prove technical deficiencies in the bathtub installation.
- The contractor charged only for two doors that were installed, acknowledging one door was not straight but no charge was made.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The customer claimed damages for emotional distress and inconvenience without proving a "peace of mind" contract or significant mental distress beyond ordinary upset.
- The customer did not provide evidence to prove the necessity of mortar under the bathtub for adequate support.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the contractor's work was substantially complete and whether there were any deficiencies that warranted deductions.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the contractor was entitled to payment for substantially completed work, but deductions were made for proven deficiencies because the contractor bore the burden of proving substantial completion and the customer had to prove the deficiencies.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were mentioned in the judgment.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was partly for the contractor and partly against the customer.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they have proof of substantial completion and any deficiencies to support their claim for payment.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Photographs and invoices mattered in this case.