In other words, there was no agreement to build the house in a «rustic»
manner; (2) however, because the contract gave the Respondent a «free - hand» in designing and building the Appellants» house, it was open to him to build the house in a rustic
manner if he so wished; (3) notwithstanding any such wide discretion, «the argument in relation to rusticity can not be used to whitewash every flaw in the Respondent's work»; (4) the Appellants did not act unreasonably in not signing the Respondent's daughter's
defects list; (5) some of the DJ's critical comments
about the Appellants» conduct (including accusations that they were «squeezing» the Respondent for more) appeared to be «rather excessive and unnecessary», and were «best avoided».