APN DF2 PROJECT 2 PTY LTD
v
GROCON CONSTRUCTORS (VICTORIA) PTY LTD & ANOR
[2016] HCASL 54
M188/2015
This application raises no issue of principle warranting the grant of special leave. Further, the utility of any order upon appeal is doubtful, given that the gravamen of this matter concerns a progress payment verification mechanism relating to a project which is now complete.
Pursuant to r 41.11.1, we direct the Registrar to draw up, sign and seal an order dismissing the application with costs.
S.M. Kiefel
7 April 2016P.A. Keane
Keep reading for free
Create a free CaseChat account to read APN DF2 Project 2 Pty Ltd v Grocon Constructors (Victoria) P... 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
- [2016] HCASL 54
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue before the court was whether the application warranted the grant of special leave to appeal. The focus was on whether the matter raised any significant legal principles that warranted the intervention of the High Court. Additionally, the court had to consider the utility of any potential orders that might be made upon appeal, given that the construction project in question was now complete.
The court concluded that no significant legal principles were at stake in the application, and that the primary concern of the matter related to a progress payment verification mechanism for a completed project. Consequently, the court determined that the application did not warrant the grant of special leave. The Full Court also found that the utility of any order upon appeal was doubtful. Therefore, the application was dismissed with costs.
The final orders of the court were that the Registrar was directed to draw up, sign, and seal an order dismissing the application with costs. This decision was made on 7 April 2016 by S.M. Kiefel, with P.A. Keane concurring.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
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
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.