Aquatec-Maxcon Pty Ltd v Minson Nacap Pty Ltd

Aquatec-Maxcon Pty Ltd brought an action against Minson Nacap Pty Ltd seeking summary judgment for unpaid progress claims following the termination of a sub-contract. The dispute arose under the standard form of contract, A.S.4303-1995, and the primary focus was on the interpretation of clauses 42 and 44. Aquatec-Maxcon argued it was entitled to judgment for the outstanding progress claims, while Minson Nacap contended that there were arguable defences that precluded such judgment.

The court was tasked with determining whether the defendant, Minson Nacap, had raised an arguable defence that precluded Aquatec-Maxcon from obtaining summary judgment. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the judge was entitled to enter summary judgment when the defendant had admitted the existence of the sub-contract on the pleadings. Another issue was whether the defendant was entitled to amend its defence to deny the existence of the sub-contract after admitting it.

The court found that although Minson Nacap had admitted the existence of the sub-contract on the pleadings, this did not preclude it from raising a defence that the sub-contract had been terminated prior to the submission of the progress claims. However, the court held that the defence raised by Minson Nacap was not arguable. Consequently, the judge was entitled to enter summary judgment in favour of Aquatec-Maxcon for the undisputed amount of the progress claims. The court also determined that Minson Nacap was not entitled to amend its defence to deny the existence of the sub-contract after it had already been admitted on the pleadings.

Aquatec-Maxcon was granted judgment for the outstanding progress claims, with interest. Minson Nacap was ordered to pay Aquatec-Maxcon's costs of the proceeding.