Case Study Archive

Below you can see our full case archive.

There are a total of 1503 cases in our archive
  • 13th December 2007
    Majeed v Mahmud & 4 Ors [2007] NSWSC 1413
    BUILDING & CONSTRUCTION – Security of Payment – where no payment schedule – disallowance of amounts apparently not in respect of construction work or related servicesLEGISLATION CITED: (NSW) Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 ss 13, 14, 15 - (NSW) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 r 11.4
  • 11th December 2007
    Auckland Waterproofing v TPS Consulting HC AK CIV-2007-404-005890 [2007] NZHC 1419
  • 7th December 2007
    TS Recoveries P/L v Sea-Slip Marinas (Aust) P/L [2007] NSWSC 1410
    CORPORATIONS - winding up - company concedes insolvency - whether winding up proceedings should be dismissed as an abuse of process - whether the court should in its discretion dismiss or adjourn the winding up proceedings  LEGISLATION CITED: Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) - Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), ss 459E, 459R(2), 467(1)(a) - Judicial Review Act 1991 (Qld)
  • 30th November 2007
    City Inn Ltd v Shepherd Construction Ltd [2007] ScotCS CSOH_190
  • 30th November 2007
    PC Harrington Contractors Ltd v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd [2007] EWHC 2833 (TCC)
  • 29th November 2007
    Williams (Mrs Sandra) t/a Sanclair Construction v Abdul Noor t/a India Kitchen [2007]
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit Whether an adjudication is brought by the wrong party or whether is it brought by the right party but in the wrong name is a question of fact. His Honour Judge Hickinbottom – Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court Background The parties entered into an agreement under which the claimant agreed to carry out building works at a take away restaurant to convert it into a seated dining restaurant.  The agreement included a provision allowing either party to refer disputes to adjudication and the adjudication provisions would be those set out in the Scheme for Construction Contracts.  The adjudicator would be appointed by the President of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.  However, the adjudicator was...
  • 21st November 2007
    Berem Interiors Pty Limited v Shaya Constructions (NSW) Pty Limited [2007] NSWSC 1340
    [BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY SECURITY OF PAYMENT ACT 1999] - Whether determination issued by adjudicator void - Whether jurisdictional error due to absence of construction contract between plaintiff and first defendant. LEGISLATION CITED: Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999
  • 20th November 2007
    Ledwood Mechanical Engineering Ltd v Whessoe Oil and Gas Ltd [2007] EWHC 2743 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit (a) Where a dispute regarding an interim payment is referred to adjudication under the Scheme for Construction Contracts (the “Scheme”), the adjudicator’s decision must be applied to the interim payment that was originally in dispute and should not be applied to a later interim payment falling due after the adjudication was commenced.  (b) The paying party to an adjudication may set off an amount against monies payable to the receiving party pursuant to the adjudicator’s decision only where it follows logically from the adjudicator’s decision that the paying party is entitled to recover that specific amount. Set off will not be permitted where the quantum of the sum that the paying party seeks to set off is disputed.  Technology...
  • 15th November 2007
    Harris Calnan Construction Co. Ltd v Ridgewood (Kensington) Ltd [2007] EWHC 2738 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit If a respondent does not reserve his position in relation to any jurisdictional challenge he raises in an adjudication, the court may imply that this means that the respondent is content to be bound by the adjudicator’s decision on the jurisdictional challenge.His Honour Judge Coulson QC – Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court Background The Defendant raised the argument in the adjudication that the adjudicator did not have the necessary jurisdiction to decide the dispute because there was no contract in writing.  The adjudicator considered this submission and decided that there was a contract in writing.  Therefore, the jurisdictional challenge failed. An issue that arose in enforcement proceedings...
  • 14th November 2007
    Minimax Fire Fighting Systems Pty Ltd v Bremore Engineering (WA) Pty Ltd & Ors [2007] QSC 333
    CONTRACTS – BUILDING ENGINEERING AND RELATED CONTRACTS – ADJUDICATION - where the first respondent sent the applicant an invoice for building work completed – where the applicant sent an email to the first respondent refusing to accept the invoice and suggesting the parties meet to discuss the claim and amount payable – where in response the first respondent applied under s21 of the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) for an adjudication of the dispute – where the second respondent was appointed as adjudicator – where the applicant argued that the appointment was precluded on the grounds that the applicant had issued a payment schedule to the first respondent as defined under the Act – whether the applicant’s email constituted a payment schedule under s18 of the Act – whether the second respondent should have granted...