Myer and other businesses launch legal action over 2016 Hobart Rivulet wall collapse and flood

A building company and an engineering firm are facing a huge damages claim over the Hobart Rivulet wall collapse and flood.

BUSINESSES affected by the 2016 Hobart Rivulet wall collapse, which flooded shops including Myer just months after its rebuilt Liverpool St store opened, will return to court next month as they seek more than $15.5 million in damages from a building firm and an engineering firm.

Hutchinson Builders and Gandy & Roberts are facing legal action from Myer and the owners of the Cat & Fiddle Arcade, the owners of the Myer site and the project manager of the Myer redevelopment, and from seven Cat & Fiddle Arcade shops that were damaged by the wall collapse and flood.

Myer’s Liverpool St store opened in November 2015, eight years after the store was destroyed by fire.

GALLERY: FLOODING AT OLD MYER SITE

GALLERY: FIRE DESTROYS HOBART’S MYER BUILDING

A section of the damaged wall and buildings after the Hobart Rivulet collapse. Picture: MATT THOMPSON

Works at Myer’s Murray St site — where the Icon Complex opened last year — involved underpinning works, undertaken by Hutchinson Builders, and engineering advice from Gandy & Roberts.

In a statement of claim filed with the Supreme Court in Hobart, Myer site owners E Kalis Properties and the project manager of the Murray St Myer redevelopment, Kalis CBD Development, said Gandy & Roberts, the project’s engineering consultants, knew about risks associated with the site, including that the wall could collapse if it was not appropriately supported during underpinning works.

They say Gandy & Roberts “failed to include any, or any adequate lateral support of the Hobart Rivulet wall in its engineering designs”.

The companies also argue Gandy & Roberts had concerns in June 2016 about the way in which Hutchinson Builders was undertaking the underpinning works and was advised on June 29 that Hutchinson Builders had over-excavated an area and there had been a partial collapse of the wall.

The legal action relates to the July 27 flood, which followed the collapse of a section of the Hobart Rivulet wall. Myer’s Liverpool St basement and the Murray St construction site were flooded and several other shops were damaged.

DREDGING TO UNEARTH MYSTERY OF MYER FLOOD

The flooded Liverpool St section of the Myer site. Picture: MATT THOMPSON

According to documents filed with the court, about 700 million litres of water flooded the site and adjacent properties.

The Kalis companies say in their statement of claim that Gandy & Roberts did not inform either of them about its concerns or about the previous partial collapse of the wall.

“On or about 1 July 2016, Gandy & Roberts decided that it would cease providing engineering advice to Hutchinson Builders on the project due to its concerns about site safety, concerns about Hutchinson Builders’ failure to follow engineering advice, and lack of confidence in Hutchinson Builders’ key project personnel, but Gandy & Roberts failed to advise the plaintiffs of these concerns, and on or about 4 July 2016 Gandy & Roberts was notified of, and inspected, damage in the rear of the Cat & Fiddle Retail Centre caused by underpinning works, but it failed to advise the [Kalis companies] of same,” the statement reads.

The companies say Hutchinson Builders was negligent in the way it carried out the underpinning work and should have foreseen the risk of the wall collapsing if it were not supported.

The Kalis companies are seeking $4.2 million in damages, Myer is also seeking damages of $4.2 million, the owners of the Cat & Fiddle Arcade are seeking damages of $5.2 million, and seven shops that were damaged by the flood — The Athletes Foot, Katies, Dotti, Portmans, Just Jeans, Jacqui E and Cue — are seeking a combined total of almost $2 million.

The seven shops, in their statement of claim, say “significant” cracks appeared in the floor and/or walls of shops occupied by Dotti and Portmans between early June and early July 2016 during construction work.

“The cracking was not present prior to the commencement of the construction works,” the statement reads.

“In or around early to mid July 2016 Gandy & Roberts was notified of the cracking or some of the cracking. In or around early to mid July 2016 Hutchinsons was notified of the cracking or some of the cracking.”

The businesses argue neither did anything to investigate the cause of the cracking, did anything to stop it or prevent it from worsening.

The matter is expected to return to court on November 14.