Case Study Archive

Below you can see our full case archive.

There are a total of 1503 cases in our archive
  • 6th July 2011
    Lanes v Galliford Try [2011] EWHC 1679 (TCC)
    Following an adjudicator's decision Part 8 proceedings to challenge the decision and enforcement proceedings were heard together. The decision was claimed by Lanes to be a nullity because; 1) Galliford had previously commenced an adjudication on the same point but had had not pursued it before another adjudicator.  Lanes said that there was no entitlement to start again; 2) the decision was also claimed to be a product of apparent bias. The adjudicator had issued "Preliminary Views and Findings of Fact" before the Response had been served.  Lanes alleged that this document which looked and read like a decision suggested that the adjudicator had already made up his mind. Much of the preliminary document was reproduced in the decision.  Held: The implication of a bar against starting the adjudication again was rejected.  The apparent bias argument was however succesful...
  • 21st June 2011
    H M Australia Holdings Pty Limited v Edelbrand Pty Limited t/a Domus Homes & Anor [2011] NSWSC 604
    Judicial review of Adjudication Determination - certiorari- "related goods and services" - construction contract- basic and essential requirements- jurisdictional error- jurisdictional fact- calculated otherwise than by reference to the value of the work- appointment of adjudicator notification of appointment Legislation Cited: Architects Act 2003 (NSW) Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW).
  • 17th June 2011
    Urang v Century Investments & Eclipse Hotels [2011] EWHC 1561 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-lawnow.com/adjudication Judgment Date: 17.06.2011 SUMMARY (1)  Where a contract provides for payment of  a sum certified as due by an independent third party that is a “sum due” under the contract. In the absence of a withholding notice (and provided the certificate is not invalid by reason of error or irregularity in relation to its issue), the sum certified must be paid by the date specified for payment. (2) The need to issue a withholding notice applies only to sums stated as due in interim certificates. There is no requirement to serve a withholding notice in relation to other claims made by a contractor, whether under a different provision in the contract or for damages. (3) However, an error in this respect made by the Adjudicator in this case was an error in law...
  • 16th June 2011
    Jantom Construction Pty Ltd -v- S&V Quality Interiors (NSW) Pty Ltd [2011] NSWSC 670
    Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) Cases Cited: Chase Oyster Bar v Hamo Industries [2010] NSWCA 190
  • 11th June 2011
    James Trowse Constructions Pty Ltd v ASAP Plasterers Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] QSC 145
    Contracts – Building, Engineering and related contracts, Remuneration – Statutory Regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments  - Progress Payments- where the applicant entered into a subcontract with the first respondent to carry out certain contractual works – where the first respondent served a payment claim on the applicant pursuant to the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) – where the third respondent adjudicator made an adjudication decision in favour of the first respondent – where the applicant argued that the adjudicator failed to properly consider the construction contract and decided a variation claim on a basis which neither party had contended – whether the adjudicator’s decision was tainted by an absence of good faith and/or breach of natural justice – whether the adjudication...
  • 3rd June 2011
    Walton Construction (Qld) Pty Ltd v Corrosion Control Technology Pty Ltd & Ors [2011] QSC 67
    Contracts - Building, Engineering and related contracts - Remuneration - Statutory regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments - Payment claims - where the applicant was the main contractor for a building project – where the first respondent was a sub-contractor engaged by the applicant – where the first respondent made a claim for payment from the applicant – whether the claim for payment was valid Arbitration – Conduct of the Arbitration proceedings – Powers, Duties and Discretion of Arbitrator – Duty to observe Rules of Natural Justice – where the third respondent made a decision under the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) regarding the claim for payment - whether the third respondent complied with the obligation to afford natural justice – whether the decision made by the third respondent...
  • 3rd June 2011
    Vantage Holdings Pty Ltd v JHC Developments Group Pty Ltd [2011] QSC 155
    Contracts – Building, Engineering and related contracts – Remuneration – Statutory regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments – where the plaintiff claims payment of outstanding balances by the defendant – where the plaintiff served claims for progress payments - Procedure – Supreme court procedure – Queensland – Procedure under Uniform - Civil procedure rules and Predecessors – Summary Jugment – where the plaintiff files an application for summary judgment – where the application is by its express terms made pursuant to rule 292 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld) – whether the defendant had filed a notice of intention to defend – whether the application is one for judgment pursuant to the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld). - Procedure - Supreme...
  • 24th May 2011
    Cain Electrical v Richard Cox t/a Pennine Control Systems [2011] EWHC 2681 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-lawnow.com/adjudication Judgment date: 24 May 2011 SUMMARY (1) The question of the jurisdiction of the Adjudicator was a question for the court.  Subject to any argument of election or estoppel (which was not advanced in this case), this question is not determined or circumscribed by what either party may have argued before the Adjudicator.  (2) Where, therefore, at the time of the adjudication one of the parties was relying upon terms orally agreed but the parties come to agree, after the Adjudicator has made his decision, that  a contract wholly  in writing was in force between the parties, the Court will enforce the Adjudicator’s decision.Technology and Construction Court, Judge Havelock-Allan Q.C.BACKGROUNDThe dispute arose from a sub-sub-contract to carry out...
  • 18th May 2011
    Penfold Projects Pty Ltd v Securcorp Limited [2011] QDC 77
    Contracts - Building, Engineering and related contracts – Remuneration– Statutory regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments – Payment claims– where the applicant and the respondent entered into a construction contract – where a Construction Manager was the third party to the contract – where in December 2010 and January 2011 the applicant sent by email to the Construction Manager documents addressed to the respondent care of the Construction Manager – where those documents were headed as “Progress Claim” and contained the statement, “This is a progress claim under the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004” – where neither claim had been paid in part or in full by the respondent – where there was evidence on behalf of the respondent that the applicant at no...
  • 12th May 2011
    Duynstee v Dickins [2011] NSWSC 408
    Appeal from Local Court - power to order stay of appeal until security for costs is given - principles applicable - failure by a party to meet previous cost orders - interests of justice - consideration of past and anticipated costs. Legislation Cited:Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 Civil Procedure Act 2005 -District Court Act 1973 - District Court Rules 1973 - Local Court Act 2007 - Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005