- Home
- Nomination
- UK Cases
- Overseas Cases
- Panel
- Guidance
- Glossary
- Legislation
- England & Wales
- Wales
- Scotland
- Northern Ireland
- Australia (Australian Capital Territory)
- Australia (New South Wales)
- Australia (Northern Territory)
- Australia (Queensland)
- Australia (Southern Territory)
- Australia (Tasmania)
- Australia (Victoria)
- Australia (Western Australia)
- Eire
- Isle of Man
- Malaysia
- New Zealand
- Singapore
- Links
- Contact Us
Case Study Archive
Below you can see our full case archive.
There are a total of 1503 cases in our archive-
5th July 2005Tolfab v Tie [2005] NSWSC 326BUILDING & CONSTRUCTION Whether the decision of an Adjudicator should be set aside for failure to take into consideration material in the Adjudication Response; failure to give proper and adequate reasons; failure to value the work; resulting in a breach of natural justice, or failure by the Adjudicator to bona fide exercise power.HELD: Proceedings dismissed Adjudicator did value the works, give appropriate reasons, did not fail to take into account part of submissions. There was no breach of natural justice. There is no question of there being no bona fide exercise of power.
-
30th June 2005Bennett (Tracey) v FMK Construction Ltd. [2005] EWHC 1268 (TCC)This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Technology and Construction Court, London His Honour Judge Richard Havery QC 30 June 2005 A dispute was referred to an adjudicator within 28 days of the issue of the final certificate under a contract based on the JCT Private Without Quantities. However, following a procedural challenge, the adjudicator resigned and the contractor re-submitted the dispute to him, but after the expiry of the 28 day period for commencing proceedings under clause 30.9.3 of the contract. The Court held that, in such a scenario, the final certificate was not conclusive evidence under clause 30.9.3 in respect of the matters relating to the first adjudication. Mr Bennett employed FMK Construction Limited ("FMK") to carry out building and refurbishment works at his property....
-
30th June 2005Baker & Davies Plc v Leslie Wilks Associates (a firm) [2005] EWHC 1179
-
30th June 2005Kane Constructions P/L v Sopov [2005] VSC 237CONTRACT — Building contract — Construction — Progress certificates — Claims for payment — Evidence and information in support of progress claims — Whether material supporting claims condition precedent to issue of a payment certificate — Validity of late progress claims — Validity of late progress certificates — Assessment procedures — Estoppel — Delay and extension of time claims — Liquidated damages — Right of principal to deduct liquidated damages from progress payments — Role of the superintendent — Undue influence — Suspension of works under the contract — Right of principal to access retention moneys under the contract — Substantial breach — Repudiation — Termination — Alternative rights and remedies available to aggrieved party as a result of repudiation —...
-
28th June 2005Cooper v Veghelyi [2005] NSWSC 602Building and Construction Industry (Security of Payment) Act 1999 (NSW) (BCISP Act)Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001
-
23rd June 2005Falgat Constructions v Masterform [2005] NSWSC 525Corporations - application to set aside judgment debt under s 459G of the Corporations Act. Judgment debt following on adjudication under the Building & Construction Industry Security of Payment Act. Whether such judgment was on the merits and created a res judicata sufficient to prevent the raising of a genuine dispute. Held genuine dispute could be raised.
-
23rd June 2005Bell v Pearce (Home Building) [2005] NSWCTTT 433LEGISLATION: Home Building Act 1989 - Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal Act 2001 - Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999
-
21st June 2005Lafarge (Aggregates) Ltd. v London Borough of Newham [2005] EWHC 1337 (Comm)This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes An adjudicator's decision, when issued by email, will (subject to any express terms of the contract) be taken as given on the date it was emailed, even though it had not been signed. Further, the issue of an adjudicator's decision would not be subject to provisions under the contract governing service of 'Notices'. In absence of any definition in a contract, the court held that the expression 'working day' meant an ordinary office working day even where there was evidence to suggest that the potential working hours of the contractor would include Saturdays. Commercial Court, London Mr Justice Cooke 24 June 2005 In June 2001 the London Borough of Newham ("LBN") employed Lafarge (Aggregates) Limited ("Lafarge") to provide certain construction...
-
17th June 2005Taylor Projects Group P/L v Brick Dept. P/L [2005] NSWSC 571Building and construction - Practice and procedure - Proceedings by head contractor against subcontractor seeking to impugn an adjudication determination made under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) - Agreement to the effect that plaintiff would refrain from seeking injunctive relief to prevent determination registration and would pay funds into Court on the basis that in the event defendant succeeded in upholding adjudication determination, subject funds would be released to defendant forthwith upon it filing the adjudication certificate as a judgment in a court pursuant to the Act - District Court proceedings to determine the parties respective legal rights on final basis - Decision of Supreme Court that adjudication determination valid - Plaintiff opposes release to defendant of funds held by Supreme Court contending that defendant's financial position...