Case Study Archive

Below you can see our full case archive.

There are a total of 1503 cases in our archive
  • 23rd November 2005
    Nepean Engineering P/L v Total Process Services P/L (In Liquidation) [2005] NSWCA 409
    BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION - Progress payments - Building & Construction Industry Security of Payment Act - Payment claims - Requirement of identification of work - Consequences of defecient identification - Whether payment claim a nullity - Whether, in absence of a payment schedule, a payment claim pruporting to identify the work can support a cause of action under s.15 of the Act - Whether summary judgment available.  LEGISLATION CITED: Building & Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999, ss.13-15, 20-22
  • 18th November 2005
    Hatmet Ltd v Herbert (t/a LMS Lift Consultancy) [2005] EWHC 3529 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The construction contract must be made in writing, by exchange of communications in writing or evidenced in writing for the statutory provisions relating to adjudication to apply (s.107 HGCRA).  In this case, the court held that even a simple contract that did not spell out terms regarding methodology or design specification could meet this requirement.  This was so even though the court also found it necessary/appropriate to imply a term that the employer would pay a reasonable price because the parties had not agreed a revised price following changes to the specification for the works.  Her Honour Judge Kirkham – Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction CourtBackground Bouygues was the main contractor on a construction...
  • 16th November 2005
    Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 1358
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The Court of Appeal has reaffirmed the approach of the courts to adjudicator’s decisions, namely that they are to be treated as enforceable, and will only be interfered with in rare situations. This is so even if the adjudicator has made obvious or highly arguable errors of fact or law. The facts of this case were quite detailed, but in headline terms they concerned a dispute over a subcontractor’s entitlement to payment for performing works in upgrading a dock. The terms of payment under the subcontract, and a related “alliance agreement” between the parties, used a “target cost” mechanism, so that the pain or gain of cost overruns or savings would be shared between them. The project works were delayed, and...
  • 16th November 2005
    Clarence Street P/L v Isis Project P/L [2005] NSWCA 391
    CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS – payment claims to progress payments – payment schedules – ss 13, 14, 15 Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 – statutory debt – failure to identify the construction work to which the claimed progress payment relates – function of a payment claim – interpretation of s13(2)(a) – due date for progress payments – reference date – express provision – whether payment claim must meet contractual requirements for payment to be due – prohibition in s15(4)(b)(ii). (D)  LEGISLATION CITED: Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999
  • 15th November 2005
    Blueview Construction Pty Ltd (t/a WRS Constructions) v Vain Lodge Holdings Pty Ltd [2005] VCC 1325
  • 14th November 2005
    Midland Expressway Ltd v Carillion Construction Ltd (No1) [2005] EWHC 2810 (TCC)
  • 14th November 2005
    Shellbridge P/L v Rider Hunt Sydney P/L [2005] NSWSC 1152
    BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION - progress payments - Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act - duty of adjudicator to consider submissions as incident of measure of natural justice required by the Act - whether duty discharged  ACTS CITED: Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999, ss.8(2)(b), 13, 17, 21(4)(a), 25
  • 11th November 2005
    Captiva Estates Ltd v Rybarn Ltd [2005] EWHC 2744 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Section 6 of the Construction Contracts Exclusion Order 1998, Statutory Instrument 1998 No 648 is not concerned only with unconditional agreements; a contract containing the grant of an option to take a leasehold or freehold interest in the land on which construction operations take place would fall within the ambit of section 6 of the Exclusion Order.  Further, the grant or disposal of the leasehold or freehold interest of the land does not need to relate to the whole of the land on which the principal construction operations take place under the contract. Judge David Wilcox Technology and Construction Court Captiva entered into a written contract with Rybarn whereby Rybarn agreed to construct 28 residential flats and 28 parking spaces (either...
  • 10th November 2005
    David McClean Contractors Ltd v The Albany Building Ltd [2005] TCC 101/05
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes There is no right to set-off against sums found due by an adjudicator on the basis that a party might be entitled to monies if it succeeds in a claim that it puts forward at a later date.  Allegations of a breach of natural justice by the adjudicator, lack of jurisdiction, and that the adjudicator had already decided the issue in an earlier adjudication, were all rejected on the facts of the case. His Honour Judge Gilliland QC, Salford District Registry, Technology & Construction Court Albany engaged David McLean Contractors (DMC) as contractors under a JCT form of building contract.  Disputes arose between the parties regarding certain interim payments and Albany’s entitlement to deduct liquidated and ascertained damages (LADs)...
  • 8th November 2005
    Holmwood Holdings P/L v Halkat Electrical Contractors P/L [2005] NSWSC 1129
    BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION – ADMINISTRATIVE LAW – Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 –grounds for judicial review – grounds on which purported determination may be void – effect of failing to advert, at all, to relevant term of contract - failure to have regard to relevant considerations – distinction between error in considering relevant term and failing to consider it at all - good faith – content of good faith – not limited to dishonesty malice or personal interest – extends to capriciousness – requires genuine and conscientious attempt to exercise power – effect of deciding adjudication on questions of credit where credit irrelevant and failing to attempt to resolve issues by means provided by statute – effect of failing to advert, at all, to a submission made by a party on central issue...