Case Study Archive

Below you can see our full case archive.

There are a total of 1503 cases in our archive
  • 27th April 2009
    Roseville Bridge Marina Pty Ltd v Bellingham Marine Australia Pty Ltd [2009] NSWSC 320
    Building and Construction Contracts – Adjudications under Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act – application for declaration that defendant builder is not entitled to adjudicated amounts and injunction restraining registration and enforcement of adjudication - whether agreement between plaintiff principal and defendant resulted in binding agreement whereby builder was not entitled to recover payment for certain additional works over and above an agreed sum, the value of which was included in adjudicated amount – if so, whether agreement was avoided by s 34 – whether subsequent agreement for settlement of proceedings 5158/08 on terms that an amount be paid into court pending outcome of proceedings precluded prosecution of a progress payment claim – if so, whether such agreement was avoided by s 34 – whether principal...
  • 24th April 2009
    Hickory Developments Pty Ltd v Schiavello (Vic) Pty Ltd and Anor [2009] VSC 156
    Building and Construction – Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) – object and purpose of the Act - payment claim - whether application lodged within time with the nominating authority in accordance with s.18 of the Act - whether payment claim in accordance with s.14 of the Act - Brodyn Pty Ltd v Davenport [2004] NSWCA 394 not followed in part, applied in part – whether alleged deficiencies in procedure essential pre-conditions to jurisdiction - whether matters for the adjudicator to decide -whether adjudicator’s determination void.
  • 24th April 2009
    Duynstee v Dickens & Dickens [2009] NSWSC 292
    contract for fire protection of boundary fence whether contract excluded under s 7(2)(b) from the operation of Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999
  • 17th April 2009
    J Hutchinson Pty Ltd v Thunder Investments Pty Ltd [2009] QDC 90
    Contracts – Building, Engineering and related Contracts – Statutory Regulation of Entitlement to and recovery of Progress Payments – whether applicant had an entitlement to make a progress claim under s 12 of the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004(Qld) – whether applicant made a valid payment claim under the Act – whether applicant estopped from relying upon and asserting rights under the Act
  • 15th April 2009
    Dualcorp Pty Ltd v Remo Constructions Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 69
    Contracts  - Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 - progress claim for amounts the subject of a previous claim - adjudicator's determination that most of previous claim not maintainable - whether further claim precluded by provisions of the Act or principles of estoppel -  Estoppel - issue estoppel - adjudication under Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999  
  • 15th April 2009
    Appleby v Nellis [2009] NSWSC 299
    Procedure - judgments and orders - enforcement of judgments and orders - application for judgment to be stayed - application dismissed SUMMARY The Defendant, a judgment debtor, sought a stay to the operation and enforcement of the judgment.  The judgment was in respect of an undertaking under a Deed of Settlement and Guarantee and Indemnity which provided that on default the Defendant would consent to a judgment in favour of the Plaintiff. One arm of the Defendants defence was that she had started seperate proceedings against the Plaintiff for damages.  She submitted also that she should be entitled to a stay if, as she contended, the Plaintiff was insolvent. The judge was referred to Grosvenor Constructions (NSW) Pty Ltd (in admin) v Musico & Ors [2004] NSWSC 344,  but he considered that that case, in the context of the Act with which provided for a provisional, and...
  • 8th April 2009
    HS Works Limited v Enterprise Managed Services Limited [2009] EWHC 729 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit summary Where a Court is asked to deal simultaneously with two adjudication enforcements between the same parties which decide different things but which might or do impact on each other, the court, may subject to specified steps, set off one decision against another. Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Akenhead BACKGROUND HS Works Limited (“HSW”) is a civil engineering contractor within the utilities sector and was employed by Enterprise Managed Services Limited (“Enterprise”), a utilities contractor, as a sub-contractor to assist with clean water, network repair and maintenance services for Thames Water.  The sub-contract works included the repair, reinstatement and re-surfacing of highways in and around...
  • 6th April 2009
    Rupert Cordle v Vanessa Nicholson [2009] EWHC 1314 (QB)
  • 2nd April 2009
    Match Projects Pty Ltd and Arccon (WA) Pty Ltd [2009] WASAT 56
    Construction Contracts Act 2004 (WA) - Application for extension of time -  Legislation: Builders' Registration Act 1939 (WA) - Construction Contracts Act 2004 (WA), s 3, s 26, s 26(1), s 26(1)(b), s 29(3), s 30, s 31(2), s 31(2)(a), s 31(2)(a)(i), s 31(2)(b), s 31(3), s 32(2)(a), s 32(2)(b), s 32(3), s 33, s 36, s 41(1), s 42(2), s 46, s 46(1), s 46(2), s 49 - Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) - State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 (WA), s 29(3)(c)(i), s 29(3)(c)(ii), s 42, s 91 -  State Administrative Tribunal Rules 2004 (WA), r 10 - Town Planning and Development Act 1928 (WA)
  • 27th March 2009
    The Mayor and Burgess of the London Borough of Camden v Makers UK Limited [2009] EWHC 605
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit SUMMARY Courts have a discretion to impose conditions when setting aside a default judgment, but will rarely – if ever – exercise that discretion so as to prevent parties from pursuing their statutory right under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (“the Construction Act”) to adjudicate “at any time”. Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Akenhead BACKGROUND The London Borough of Camden (“Camden”) engaged Makers UK Ltd (“Makers”) to carry out refurbishment works to the value of £4.3m.  Disputes arose concerning variations and delays.  Camden alleged that Makers were in default of their contractual obligation to proceed regularly and diligently and purported to...