- Home
- Nomination
- UK Cases
- Overseas Cases
- Panel
- Guidance
- Glossary
- Legislation
- England & Wales
- Wales
- Scotland
- Northern Ireland
- Australia (Australian Capital Territory)
- Australia (New South Wales)
- Australia (Northern Territory)
- Australia (Queensland)
- Australia (Southern Territory)
- Australia (Tasmania)
- Australia (Victoria)
- Australia (Western Australia)
- Eire
- Isle of Man
- Malaysia
- New Zealand
- Singapore
- Links
- Contact Us
Australia (Queensland) Cases
Click on a case to view.
-
17th November 2010
Singh v Worner Electrical Industries [2010] QCATA 83Leave to Appeal – Minor civil dispute – where no new evidence – whether evidence properly considered in primary decision – whether error in primary decision - Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 ss 10, 12, 20(a)(i) - Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal 2009 ss 28(2), 142(3)(a)(i) - Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond (1990) 170 CLR 321
-
17th September 2010
Leighton Contractors v Vision Energy [2010] QSC 353Contracts – Building, Engineering and related contracts – where the applicant subcontracted lighting and electrical installation to the respondent pursuant to a schedule of rates contract in February 2009 – substantial completion of the works in December 2009 – applicant submitted release and waiver to respondent pursuant to contract – where respondent could provide written response to the details in the release and waiver – where release and waiver was "final and binding" on both parties if respondent failed to return or respond, and to the extent it did not disagree with the details in it –where respondent submitted progress claim pursuant to Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) s 17 – where applicant served a payment schedule – where respondent lodged an adjudication application under the Building and Construction...
-
14th September 2010
Eastern Well Service No 2 Pty Ltd v Campac (Aust) Pty Ltd [2010] QSC 350Contracts – Building, Engineering and related Contracts – where applicant engaged to construct a mobile camp – where respondent was to build the camp by 12 August 2010 for the applicant – where delays occurred – where applicant seeks an interlocutory injunction requiring the respondent to deliver up the mobile camp or such part of it which has been constructed and to deliver up confidential information which was provided by it to the respondent in connection with the agreement to manufacture the camp – whether such interlocutory injunction should be granted.
-
10th September 2010
De Neefe Signs Pty Ltd v Build1 (Qld) Pty Ltd; Traffic Technologies Traffic Hire Pty Ltd v Build1 (Qld) Pty Ltd [2010] QSC 279Contracts – Building, engineering and related contracts – Remuneration – Statutory regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments – Adjudication of payment claims – Validity of adjudication application and decision – Validity of payment claim - Contracts – Building, engineering and related contracts – Remuneration – Statutory regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments – Payment claims – What constitutes valid payment claim – Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld), s 17 - Procedure – Courts and judges generally – Courts – Attempt to oust jurisdiction of court – By statute – Implied ouster – Exclusivity of jurisdiction of statutory adjudicator - Statutes – Acts of Parliament – Interpretation – Particular...
-
6th August 2010
Mansouri & Anor v Aquamist P/L [2010] QCA 209Contracts – General contractual principles – Building, Engineering and related contracts – Remuneration – Statutory regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments – Progress payments – where the appellants were the registered owners of the land on which the respondent carried out work – where the respondent alleged that the appellants were liable for progress payments under the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) (“BCIPA”) – where the primary judge gave summary judgment in favour of the respondent for a progress payment under s 19(2)(a)(i) BCIPA – where the appellants argued that the primary judge erred as there was a factual dispute about the existence of a construction contract – where the respondent conceded that the primary judge’s analysis...
-
23rd July 2010
T & T Building Pty Ltd v GMW Group Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] QSC 211Contracts – Building, Engineering and related contracts – Remuneration – Statutory regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments – Adjudication of payment claimsJUDICATION OF PAYMENT CLAIMS – where the Applicant was to submit monthly progress claims to the First Respondent – whether the Applicant and First Respondent varied the contract to allow the Applicant to issue progress claims every two weeks – whether post-agreement conduct can be used to determine the terms of a contract - Contracts – Building, engineering and related contracts – Remuneration - Statutory regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments – Adjudication of payment claims – where the First Respondent argued there was ‘double dipping’ in the Applicant’s payment claims – whether this...
-
15th July 2010
57 Moss Rd Pty Ltd v T&M Buckley Pty Ltd [2010] QSC 278Procedure– Costs - Security for costs – where the applicant and the first respondent entered into a construction contract in 2008 – where work ceased in 2009 and the contract was eventually terminated – where the first respondent made a claim against the applicant in respect of the building works – where the second respondent conducted an adjudication in respect of that claim – where the applicant brought an application (Proceeding No 3037 of 2010) to have that adjudication set aside – where the applicant brought a claim for liquidated damages against the first respondent (Proceeding No 1737 of 2010) – where this application is brought by the first respondent for security for costs in Proceeding No 3037 of 2010 – where orders also sought that Proceeding No 3037 of 2010 and 1737 of 2010 be stayed – whether those orders should...
-
24th June 2010
Sheppard Homes Pty Ltd v FADL Industrial Pty Ltd [2010] QSC 228Contracts – Building, engineering and related contracts – The contract – Generally – Agreement for the provision of licence to use drawings – Whether a construction contract – Whether a “related service” under the Act - Procedure – Supreme Court procedure – Queensland – Jurisdiction and generally – Generally –Inherent jurisdiction to determine whether an inferior tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction - Statutes – Acts of Parliament – Interpretation – Particular words and phrases - Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld), s 3(1), s 11 – “services” and “architectural or design services” – Excludes the supply of a licence to use drawings - Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld), s 3(1), s 3(2), s 11 - Kirk...
-
1st June 2010
Thiess Pty Ltd and John Holland Pty Ltd v Civil Works Australia Pty Ltd & Ors [2010] QSC 187Administrative Law – Judicial review – Grounds of review – Procedural Fairness – Hearing – Nature of hearing – opportunity to present case – where decision made by adjudicator under the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 – where the first respondent wrote a letter to the adjudicator outside the relevant timeframe – where the applicant also wrote a letter contending that the adjudicator was precluded from considering the first respondents letter because it was provided outside the relevant timeframe – where the applicant claims that it should have been given an opportunity to respond to the letter – where the adjudicator expressly disregarded the first respondents letter – whether this constituted a failure on the part of adjudicator to afford the applicant natural justice - Administrative...
-
26th May 2010
Gisley Investments P/L v Williams & Anor [2010] QSC 178Contracts – Building engineering and related contracts - Adjudication – where the first respondent sent the applicant a payment claim under the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 – where the applicant sent an email in response on the same day disputing the amount claimed –whether the applicant’s email constituted a payment schedule under s 18 of the Act - Statutes – Acts of parliament – Interpretation - Permissive, Directory and Mandatory Powers – where the first respondent made an application under s 21 of the Act for an adjudication of the dispute, on the basis that no payment schedule had been provided by the applicant – where, if a valid payment schedule was provided by the applicant, the first respondent’s adjudication application was out of time – whether an application made...