Case Study Archive

Below you can see our full case archive.

There are a total of 1503 cases in our archive
  • 5th August 2009
    Redhill Development Limited & Ors v Green & Anor CIV-2009-404-3784
  • 5th August 2009
    Masterton Homes Pty Ltd v Palm Assets Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 234
    Appeal and New Trial – new trial – whether the trial judge failed to resolve evidence concerning the pleaded agreement - Contracts – partly written and partly oral – principles for determining whether a contract is wholly written, partly written and partly oral, or wholly oral – role of surrounding circumstances – admissibility of evidence of subsequent conduct – scope of operation of the parol evidence rule to partly written and partly oral contracts - Contracts – general contractual principles – construction and interpretation of contracts – whether surrounding circumstances can be looked to without needing to find ambiguity – present state of High Court authority on whether ambiguity is a precondition to using surrounding circumstances - Interpretation – construction of undertakings and court orders – admissibility...
  • 5th August 2009
    Adonis Construction v OKeefe Soil Remediation [2009] EWHC 2047 (TCC)
  • 4th August 2009
    Vision Homes v Lansville Construction Ltd [2009] EWHC 2042
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit In this case the court held that (a) where an adjudicator had not been appointed in accordance with the provisions of the adjudication clause in the contract, he lacked jurisdiction and his award was unenforceable; (b) where the Scheme for Construction Contracts applied, there could be two adjudications on the same issue at the same time provided that no decision had been reached in either adjudication. The Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Christopher Clarke Background Vision Homes Limited (“Vision”) employed Lancsville Construction Ltd (“LCL”) to undertake works in relation to a number of new apartment blocks.  LCL and Vision subsequently fell into dispute on a number of matters, including whether or...
  • 31st July 2009
    John Holland Pty Ltd v TAC Pacific Pty Ltd & Ors [2009] QSC 205
    Administrative Law – Judicial Review – Grounds of Review – Procedural Fairness – Existence of obligation – particular cases – where an adjudication of a payment claim under the Building and Construction Payments Act 2004 (Qld) – where the adjudicator made the decision on the basis of an appellate authority which was not referred to by either party – where the parties were not afforded the opportunity to address the adjudicator’s view that the authority overruled another authority upon which a party placed particular reliance – whether there was a substantial denial of natural justice.
  • 29th July 2009
    Beck Interiors Limited v Dr Mario Luca Russo [2009] EWHC B32 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit summary Where a third party has given a personal guarantee to the performance of a contract, which subsequently becomes subject to adjudication in which he does not personally become bound by the award of the adjudicator, he would not be bound by the adjudicator’s decision in relation to his personal obligation under the guarantee. Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Ramsey Background Dr Russo was a 90% shareholder and sole director of a company in the business of providing spa treatments (the “Company”).  The Company appointed Beck Interiors Limited (“Beck”) by way of a letter of intent dated 28 October 2008 to carry out works to create new premises for the Company.  A payment schedule was appended...
  • 28th July 2009
    Baxbex Pty Ltd v Bickle [2009] QSC 194
    Contract - Building, Engineering and related contract – Remuneration – Statutory Regulation OF Entitlement to and recovery of Progress Payments – where the applicant served on the respondent a payment claim pursuant to s17 of the Building and Construction Payments Act 2004 – where the respondent did not file a payment schedule within 10 days of receiving the payment claim or at all – where applicant claimed in those circumstances the respondent became liable to pay the amount claimed – whether there was a valid payment claim – whether part of the payment claim was not for construction work or for related goods or services.
  • 28th July 2009
    Workspace Management v YJL London Ltd [2009] EWHC 2017
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit summary In this case, where adjudication and arbitration proceedings were proceeding concurrently, the Court held that a party was entitled to set-off a decision in its favour in the adjudication against an award of the arbitrator against it in the arbitration. Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Coulson Background Workspace Management Limited (“Workspace”) engaged YJL London Limited (“YJL”) to carry out construction works.  The contract between the parties incorporated adjudication provisions and an arbitration clause.  Disputes were referred to an adjudicator, who found that YJL was liable to pay Workspace substantial sums by way of liquidated damages and previously overpaid loss and expense.  YJL...
  • 27th July 2009
    Grocon Constructors Pty Ltd v Planit Cocciardi Joint Venture [2009] VSC 339
    Injunction - Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 – balance of convenience pending hearing of application for judicial review.
  • 24th July 2009
    Jim Ennis Construction v Premier Asphalt Limited [2009] EWHC 1906
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit summary An unsuccessful party to an adjudication under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (the “Construction Act”) could bring a claim to recover monies paid pursuant to the adjudicator's award notwithstanding the fact that its original counterclaim in the adjudication was statute barred by virtue of the Limitation Act 1980.  This was because there was an implied term of the contract that where one party has paid monies to the other party in compliance with the decision of an adjudicator then that party is entitled to have the dispute finally determined by legal proceedings and, if or to the extent that the dispute is finally determined in his favour, to have those monies repaid to him. The cause of action under...