Amasya Enterprises Pty Ltd & Anor v Asta Developments (Aust) Pty Ltd & Anor

Amasya Enterprises Pty Ltd and another brought an action against Asta Developments (Aust) Pty Ltd and another in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The primary dispute involved the validity of a clause in the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) and its impact on the court's jurisdiction to review adjudicator's determinations. The respondents sought to set aside a judgment that had been entered under the Act. The legal issues before the court centred on the constitutional validity of the clause and its effect on the court's ability to exercise judicial review, particularly in cases involving jurisdictional error.

The court had to determine whether the clause in the Act was consistent with the requirements of Chapter III of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act and whether it was a privative clause that could limit the Supreme Court's power to grant relief such as certiorari. The court applied the principles established in Kirk v Industrial Court (NSW) [2010] 239 CLR 531, which held that such clauses could not deprive a court of its inherent jurisdiction to correct jurisdictional errors. The court found that the clause in question could not be applied to prevent the Supreme Court from granting relief on the basis of jurisdictional error, but it could limit the court's power to grant relief in cases where the error was apparent on the face of the record. The distinction between jurisdictional error and error on the face of the record was critical to the court's reasoning.

The Supreme Court concluded that the clause did not unconstitutionally limit the court's jurisdiction to review adjudicator's determinations for jurisdictional error, but it did restrict the court's ability to grant relief in certain circumstances. The court set aside the judgment that had been entered under the Act and allowed the appeal, finding that the clause could not be applied to deprive the court of its inherent jurisdiction to correct jurisdictional errors. The final orders of the court reflected its determination that the clause was valid but limited in its operation by the requirements of Chapter III of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act.