Ms Lee's decision not to file a claim under the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 showed she knew the defects reduced the value of the house, the council said.
Her appeal against the summary judgment in the Court of Appeal was dismissed and she then went to the Supreme Court.
The highest court noted that in February 2008, Ms Lee engaged a building consultant to assess the house. He noted faults in exterior cladding, roof draining and balconies. Another report was prepared by a building surveyor in April 2011 who listed defects that had not been previously identified.
The Supreme Court allowed her to argue, in the substantive appeal, whether the application for an assessor's report under the Watertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 "stopped the clock" for limitation purposes with regards to proceedings against WDC - which means whether or not the period between February 2008 and April 2011 falls within the six-year limitation period.
Ms Lee was reluctant to comment on the case as it was still before the court but said it had been a struggle for her to get this far in legal proceedings.
Ms Lee lives in the house with her family. The matter for determination - whether, in terms of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006, the application for an assessor's report "stopped the clock" for limitation purposes with regard to the proceedings against the respondent - will now go back before the courts.