penalty of $100,000. Betterlay appealed the decision, arguing that it had not failed to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, that the safety of ’other persons’ wasn’t put at risk by the construction of the wall, as it had been told by a representative of the primary contractor, MCC, that they would perform and take responsibility for the steel reinforcing work. The Appellant Court rejected this argument, referring to s 14 of the Act which provides that duties under the Act cannot be transferred. It was also noted that the site supervisor denied taking responsibility for the task. The Court therefore held that, regardless of whether task agreed to or not, Betterlay still had a duty to ensure the work was performed correctly. Specifically, it was determined that the breach occurred when the wall was built and Betterlay last attended the site, not at the time of collapse in the following week. Building Controls Update 241: Six ACP CodeMark certificates removed All six of the original aluminium composite panel (ACP) CodeMark certificates suspended in July have been removed from the CodeMark register. Following the suspension, two have been withdrawn by the manufacturer and four have been revoked by MBIE. The decision to suspend the certificates followed an audit and peer review which identified there was insufficient documentation to support claims made on the certificates. Manufacturers were given until 31 October to rectify issues identified with their CodeMark certificates. One manufacturer made the decision to withdraw their two CodeMark certificates prior to the 31 October deadline, and MBIE has revoked the other four under Section 271(3) of the Building Act 2004. Of the four revoked certificates, two were not able to be satisfactorily revised before the deadline, and two have been revised to remove fire safety claims, and new certificates have been issued under new numbers after the manufacturers addressed the issues MBIE had identified. The current status of the certificates is as follows: • CMA-CM40035 Alucobond Cladding Systems – certificate has been revoked and superseded by CM40241-l01-R00 Kaneba Alucobond Plus Fixed Cassette System • CMA-CM40100 - Larson FR – certificate has been revoked and superseded by CM40245-l01-R00 – Larson FR • CMA-CM40094 Symonite (Alubond) Cladding Systems – withdrawn by manufacturer • CMA-CM40111-I02-R03 Symonite Cladding Systems (Reynobond FR) – withdrawn by manufacturer • CMA-CM40193-I01-R01 Vitrabond FR Cladding System – certificate has been revoked • CMA-CM40075-I01-R01 Alpolic FR ACM Panel Cladding – certificate has been revoked MBIE will be working with the certification body and the remaining two manufacturers who have had their certificates revoked to resolve outstanding issues with these CodeMark certificates and enable new certificates to be issued. This process has not unearthed evidence that these products are dangerous. Building Consent Authorities (BCAs) can no longer rely upon the revoked CodeMark certificates as evidence that the products comply with the requirements of the Building Code. BCAs will be required to consider product use on a case-by-case basis when assessing a building consent, including for building consent applications which are still being assessed. Any questions regarding the use of these CodeMark certificates can be sent to [email protected]. Building owners with fire safety concerns about cladding should contact their local council, and tenants should contact their landlord.