Last year, the Federal Court of Australia heard the case of Robinson v Kenny  FCA 988, brought against an Architect for misleading and deceptive conduct during a tendering process.
The claim against the Architect arose after building work on a new residential property commissioned by the Client was aborted when the costs of construction grossly exceeded the Client’s expectations.
Allegations made by the Client against the Architect included that:
After consideration of the evidence, Her Honour Farrell J found that the tender process was unorthodox due to the Architect being instrumental in the production of the building works quote. Her Honour also found that the Architect’s conduct, viewed as a whole, led the Client to the erroneous view that the building works could be completed for the amount indicated by the Architect to the Client.
The Builder, who was also originally a party to the proceedings was removed as a Respondent after being placed into liquidation.
Whilst the outcome of this complex case was determined by its particular factual circumstances, it is nevertheless an important reminder of the need for accurate and transparent communication with clients throughout the tender process.
For the full decision in this case, please click on the following link – Robinson v Kenny  FCA 988