Bright Days Herston Pty Ltd v ATG Project & Property Solutions Pty Ltd

The applicant, Bright Days Herston Pty Ltd, sought an injunction to prevent an adjudicator appointed under the Building Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) Act 2017 (Qld) from making a determination on a payment claim. The respondent, ATG Project & Property Solutions Pty Ltd, opposed the application, arguing that there was no basis for an apprehension of bias. The adjudicator in question was also a named respondent in separate review proceedings between the same parties concerning a different payment claim. The matter was heard in the Queensland Supreme Court.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the adjudicator's involvement in the separate review proceedings created an apprehension of bias, potentially disqualifying them from making a determination in the current adjudication. The court had to assess the adjudicator's impartiality and whether there were any circumstances that might reasonably give rise to a perception of bias. Additionally, the court considered the legal framework governing adjudication under the Act, including the standards expected of an adjudicator and the process for appointing adjudicators.

The court found that the adjudicator's prior involvement in separate proceedings did not create an apprehension of bias sufficient to warrant their disqualification. The court reasoned that the adjudicator's role in the review proceedings was distinct from their role in the current adjudication, and there was no evidence suggesting that the adjudicator's impartiality had been compromised. The court also noted that the Building Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) Act 2017 (Qld) provides mechanisms to address concerns about adjudicator bias, but such concerns must be substantiated with evidence of actual bias or a real likelihood of bias. The application for an injunction was dismissed, and the matter of costs was left to be addressed by the parties.