NEW SOUTH WALES COURT OF APPEAL
CITATION: Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd v ABB Service Pty Ltd (formerly ABB Engineering Construction Pty Ltd) [2004] NSWCA 181
FILE NUMBER(S):
CA 40970/03
HEARING DATE(S): 10,11,12,13 May 2004
JUDGMENT DATE: 15/06/2004
PARTIES:
Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd - Appellant
ABB Service Pty Ltd (formerly ABB Engineering Construction Pty Ltd) - Respondent
JUDGMENT OF: Giles JA Tobias JA Cripps AJA
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Supreme Court - Equity Division
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): ED 55033/98
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Einstein J
COUNSEL:
R Macfarlan QC & P Durack - Appellant
B Collins QC & M Orlov - Respondent
SOLICITORS:
Clayton Utz - Appellant
Abbott Tout - Respondent
CATCHWORDS:
CONTRACT - tender for construction works - letter of intent issued - formal contract to be entered into - letter of intent envisaged commencement of work prior to formal contract - work commenced and carried on while negotiations continued - whether on construction of letter of intent and with regard to the parties' prior and subsequent conduct a fourth class Masters v Cameron contract had come into existence upon commencement of work - whether party's case in a reference had included that the contract had come into existence - PROCEDURE - contractual claims abandoned in submissions in favour of quantum meruit claim - abandonment conditional on leave to amend - leave opposed - in the event, not necessary to decide question of leave or quantum meruit claim - whether judgment should have been given on contractual claims against abandoning party - COSTS - whether evidence relevant to abandoned claims remained relevant for other purposes - whether error in failing to give other party a costs benefit referable to the abandonment of claims. D.
LEGISLATION CITED:
DECISION:
In the proceedings below, dismiss the cross-claim. In the appeal, appeal dismissed with costs.
JUDGMENT:
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL
CA 40970/03
ED 55033/98GILES JA
TOBIAS JA
CRIPPS AJATuesday 15 June 2004
ABIGROUP CONTRACTORS PTY LTD v ABB SERVICES PTY LTD
Judgment
GILES JA: Judgment was given for the respondent for $4,773,962.47 on a quantum meruit claim and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent’s costs. The first issue in the appeal was whether a contract between the appellant and the respondent had come into existence; a sub-issue was whether it was open to the appellant to contend for the particular contract on which it relied. The second issue was whether the appellant was entitled to judgment on other claims which it said the respondent had abandoned. The third issue was whether the order for costs should have been moderated to reflect that abandonment.
Background
The appellant, a substantial construction company, was engaged to design and construct the Multi Use Arena (“the MUA”) within the Sydney Olympic Park precinct at Homebush Bay in Sydney. The MUA was to be the major indoor venue used for the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games, and is now known as the Superdome. It is a bowl shaped concrete…
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd v ABB Service Pty Ltd and more:
- Read every judgment in full
- Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
- See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
- Download judgments as PDF or Word
One click creates your free account or signs you in.
By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.
- Case
- [2004] NSWCA 181
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was required to determine whether, on the construction of the letter of intent and considering the parties' conduct, a contract had been formed at the time work commenced. A further issue arose regarding the appellant's case in a reference, specifically whether it had included the existence of such a contract. The appellant had, in submissions, abandoned contractual claims in favour of a quantum meruit claim, but this abandonment was conditional on leave to amend. The court also considered whether judgment should have been given on the contractual claims against the abandoning party and whether the evidence relevant to the abandoned claims remained relevant for other purposes, impacting costs.
The court's reasoning focused on the appellant's pleadings and submissions concerning the formation of a contract. The appellant's initial case alleged that the letter of intent was an offer accepted by the commencement of work. However, the referee noted that the appellant's submissions evolved, with the final position appearing to rely on the letter of intent as formalising an agreement already reached, and commencement of work evincing acceptance of terms of a contract already made, rather than concluding an offer and acceptance process. This shift meant the clause stating commencement was deemed acceptance no longer functioned to conclude a contract but rather as evidence of acceptance of an existing agreement.
The appeal was dismissed with costs. The cross-claim in the proceedings below was also dismissed.
Orders
Orders of the court
In the proceedings below, dismiss the cross-claim. In the appeal, appeal dismissed with costs.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.