German manufacturer 3A Composites GMBH has been forced to face in the New Zealand courts complaints that its aluminium cladding marketed as Alucobond is a fire risk. Building owners are seeking a court order that Composites pay upfront for cost of replacement.
Cutterscove Resort apartments in Mount Maunganui was reclad with Alucobond in 2008. Argosy Properties has two commercial properties in Auckland with Alucobond installed. Both demand 3A Composite bear the cost of any replacement.
Internationally, industry concerns about the safety of exterior aluminium cladding followed high-rise fires in Melbourne and London. New Zealand building owners with the product already installed argue Alucobond is not fit for purpose.
3A Composites challenged attempts to sue it in New Zealand, claiming New Zealand courts had no jurisdiction against 3A as an off-shore manufacturer.
The Court of Appeal ruled overseas manufacturers are liable under the Consumer Guarantees Act for consumer goods supplied in New Zealand, but the Act did not apply in this case; Alucobond cladding installed on a building is not a consumer product.
The Court of Appeal further ruled 3A Composite does have to answer claims that it breached the Fair Trading Act and that it was negligent in both its description of the product’s attributes and its failure to warn about the product risk.
These claims have yet to be decided. Marketing material promoting the product is expected to come under close judicial examination.
Body Corporate 91535 v. 3A Composites GMBH – Court of Appeal (15.12.23)
24.033