ABB Service Pty Ltd v Pyrmont Light Rail Company Ltd

In the case of ABB Service Pty Ltd v Pyrmont Light Rail Company Ltd, the dispute arose out of a construction project for the Pyrmont Light Rail. The matter was before the Supreme Court of New South Wales, where the primary issue was the validity of an arbitrator's amendment to a costs order. The original arbitrator had issued an order for costs, which was later amended to adopt and modify the original order. The parties contested whether the arbitrator had the power to make the original order and whether the subsequent amendment was within the arbitrator's authority.

The court was required to determine whether the arbitrator exceeded their powers when making the original costs order and, if so, whether the arbitrator became functus officio and was therefore unable to amend the order. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the slip rule under section 30 of the Commercial Arbitration Act 1984 applied, which would allow for the amendment if the intention was objectively ascertainable from the original order. The court also needed to assess whether the power of correction was validly exercised by the arbitrator.

In delivering the judgment, the court held that the arbitrator did not have the power to make the original costs order. Consequently, the court concluded that the arbitrator was not functus officio when making the second costs order, which adopted and amended the original order. The court found that the question posed for separate determination was answered in the negative. The court reasoned that the objective intention of the arbitrator, as expressed in the original order, aligned with the subsequent amendment, thus validating the power of correction. The court found that the amendment was within the arbitrator's authority, and the slip rule applied.

The final orders of the court dismissed the application by ABB Service Pty Ltd to set aside the amended costs order, affirming the validity of the arbitrator's amendment. The court confirmed that the arbitrator's power to correct and amend the costs order was properly exercised, and the slip rule under the Act supported the amendment.