See the following link for some background idea about this case:
Also see my previous blog in Chinses when this case just popped out:
It is the most disappointing case so far I have heard for the following reasons:
1. We yet to see a milestone case, when a product manufacture is liable for a leak building lawsuit. We can see the Ministry of Education has proofed that. But why keep it confidential?
2. Almost all councils, specially councils within the great Auckland region, have paid massive amount of money to leaky building owners, simply because it always has been the "last party standing". In most cases James Hardies products were involved. We all know that, councils money is our money, the ratepayers money.
3. This case could well be the milestone, when almost all precedent cases could be overturned. At least, from technical point of view, we need to proof that scientifically and make it public available: How "texture coated fibre cement" as a cladding system, can fail, when other variables (workmanship, design complicity, location, maintenance and etc) are constant. This technical topic is vital for both building surveying and building inspection fields.
For the sake of New Zealand Public, all findings behind this case are to be revealed.