Caboolture Park Shopping Centre Pty Ltd v White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd
[1990] FCA 141
•6 Apr 1990
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
JUDGMENT No. . !...?.!.../ ..... 2% IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
)
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY 1 No. G198 of 1986 ) GENERAL DIVISION )
BETWEEN: CABOOLTURE PARK SHOPPING
CENTRE PTY. LTD.(Applicant) AND: WRITE INDUSTRIES (QLD.) PTY.
LTD.(Respondent) AND BETWEEN: WHITE INDUSTRIES (QLD.) PTY.
LTD.
(First Cross-Claimant)
AND : CABOOLTURE PARK SHOPPING
CENTRE PTY. LTD.(First Cross-Respondent)
Judge Making 0rder:Ryan J
Date of Order: 6 April 1990
RECEIVED
Where Made: Melbourne
-9 APR1990
MINUTES OF ORDER
FEDERAL COURT OF
AUSTRALIA PRINCIPAL REGISTRY
THE COURT ORDERS:
the Federal Court Rules.
1. That there be iudnment with costs for the first - "
against the first cross-respondent on the cross-claim in the sum
of $5,521,652.61, including interest at the rate of 19% per annum
from 21 March 1987 until judgment on the sum of $3,339.643.81.2. That White Industries (Qld.) Pty. Ltd.'s costs, including the costs referred to in paragraph 1 of this order, the costs ordered on 17 August 1989 to be paid to it on the dismissal of the application herein, any reserved costs and any costs previously ordered to be paid to it which have not yet been taxed, be specified as a gross sum by Ryan J on a date to be fixed, or be ascertained in such other manner as on that date he may direct.
3. That after the expiration of 21 days from the date of this Order all exhibits be returned to the parties or persons from whose custody they were respectively produced.
NOTE: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA )
1
QUEENSLAND DISTRICT REGISTRY ) No. G198 of 1986 1 GENERAL DIVISION 1
BETWEEN: CABOOLTURE PARK SHOPPING
CENTRE PTY. LTD.(Applicant) AND : WHITE INDUSTRIES (QLD.)
PTY. LTD.(Respondent) AND BETWEEN: WHITE INDUSTRIES (QLD.)
PTY. LTD.(First Cross-Claimant) AND: CABOOLTURE PARK SHOPPING
CENTRE PTY. LTD.(First Cross-Respondent)
Coram: Ryan J
Date: 6 Aprll 1990Place: Melbourne
REASONS FOR JUDGHENT
By an application issued on 22 December 1986, the applicant, Caboolture Park Shopping Centre Pty. Ltd.
("Caboolture Park"), sought damages and other relief from the
respondent, White Industries (Qld.) Pty. Ltd. ("WIQ"), in respect of conduct alleged to contravene s.52 of the Trade Practices Act, or to constitute fraudulent misrepresentation or negligent missstatement. The conduct was alleged to have occurred in the course of negotiations which led to an agreement ("the building contract") being concluded on 9 October 1985 between Caboolture Park as owner and WIQ as
bullder for the construction of a shopping centre at
Caboolture, a satellite centre north of Brisbane.The building contract was embodied in the copyright "Building Works Contract - JCCB 1985" which, as amended by the parties, recited on its first page that:
"This is a target lump sum contract intended for building works (including alterations) where the Proprietor has appointed an Architect t o administer the Contract but where Bills of Quantities are not to form part of the Contract."
The "target" lump sum was $13,375,000.00 and the way in which that sum was made up is revealed by c1.15 which is in these terms:
"COST ADJUSTHENT 15.01
15.02 W.I.Q. letters dated 12th and 10th September as
amended form part of this contract - attached
herewith.
15.03 Items 1-41 listed below are provisional sums as
per clauses 4.03 and are subject to the conditions
as per item 1 of W.I.Q. letter dated 12/9/85.
BUDGET CABOOLTURE PARK SHOPPING CXNlXN
PROVISIONBL SUMS 1. DEMOLITION & EARTHWORKS
2. DETAIL EXCAVATION
3. TERMITE TREATMENT
4. SOIL RETAINING SYSTEM
5. CONCRETE SUPPLY
6. CONCRETE PLACE & FINISH
7. FORMWORK
8. RE0 SUPPLY
9. RE0 PLACE
10. PRE-CAST CONCRETE
11. POST TENSIONING
12. STRUCTURAL STEEL
13. METAL WORK
14. ALUM. WINDOWS & GLAZING
15. SUSP. CEILINGS & PARTITIONS
16. CARPENTER & JOINER
17. TANKING
ROOF & ROOF PLUMBER 300,000 PLUMBER.DRAINER 600,000 FLOOR COVERING & TILING 350,000 PAINTING 130,570 P.M. FRAMES & FIRE DOORS 25,000 BLOCK SUPPLY 68,000 BLOCK LABOUR 85,000 BLOCK CORE FILL 25,000 VAULTED ROOFS 256,000 DOCK LEVELLERS 65,000 COMPACTORS/GARBAGE CHUTE 70,500 ROLLER SHUTTERS ) BI-PARTING DOORS ) 76,000 FLEXI-DOORS ) SIGNS 40,000 LIFTS 350,000 MECHANICAL 1,500,000 ELECTRICAL 1,200,000 FIRE PROTECTION 460,000 LANDSCAPING 30,000 KIOSKS deleted RUBBISH BINS 5,000 SEATING deleted TOILET PARTITIONS 20,000 SUB TOTAL PRELIMINARIES
FEETARGET CONTRACT SUM
The letter from WIQ to Caboolture Park of 12 September 1985 was, omitting formal parts, in these terms:
"We confirm our discussion of 10/9/85 with your Messrs Herscu, Bennett & Briggs that White Industries are prepared to construct the above project for the adjusted tender figure on the
following basis.
l/ TARGET SUM CONTRACT
Target Sum of $13,375,000 with W.I.Q. target
fee of $350,000.
All savings on existing design information to
be shared on 60/40 basis.60% to H.D.C. and 40% to W.I.Q. with max. fee to White Industries (Qld.) Pty. Ltd. of $450,000.
All overruns on existing information to be shared on 60/40 basis with minimum fees to
W.I.Q. of $250,000.
2/ INDUSTRIAL
The above target budget figure allows for
(a) 38 hour working week (b) 40 cents/man hour site allowance
Should the project be required to pay additional allowances or shorter working week or be subject to any other industrial action or imposition. W.I.Q. would require adjustment to the target sum as a variation with no deduction to the target fee. W.I.Q. on its part however would resist all attempts by the unions to pay additional allowances or work a shorter working week as we feel this would be detrimental to our long term operations.
3/ H.D.C. REQUIREMENTS
Under the target sum arrangement W.I.Q. would require H.D.C. to use its purchasing power on all trades nominated to assist in achieving the target trade budgets.
4/ ALL TENDERS
W.I.Q. would wish to participate in
negotiations with all trades tenders to ensure
these target budgets are met.
5/ VARIATIONS Changes to the existing design would be priced and added as variations to the target sum."
On 7 August 1989, after these proceedings had occupied some 150 sitting days, they were called on for hearing in Brisbane, having been adjourned from 21 July 1989. Counsel for Caboolture Park indicated that they appeared out of courtesy to the Court but that neither they nor their instructing solicitors regarded themselves as any longer
instructed on behalf of Caboolture Park. It was further indicated that Messrs Flower & Hart, the solicitors on the record for Caboolture Park, desired leave to file a notice of withdrawal of practitioner in accordance with 0.45 r.7(2) of the Rules of this Court. I then directed that application to be made on 9 August 1989 and notlce of it to be served accordingly on Caboolture Park. That notice was served on 8 August 1989.
Also on 8 August 1989, I published findings of fact and reasons for judgment on issues pertaining to the sub-contract of, and performance of work by, Paks Contractors Pty. Ltd., a sub-contractor to WIQ to which was entrusted the construction of the formwork designated as trade package 7. I then made orders in consequence of those findings and reasons. There was no appearance on behalf of Caboolture Park on that day.
Nor did Caboolture Park appear on 9 August 1989 when I
granted leave to Messrs Flower & Hart to file a notice ofcessation to act as solicltors for Caboolture Park,
notwithstanding that the period of seven days fixed by 0.45 r.7 of the Rules of this Court had not expired. On 9 August 1989 I directed that there be served on Caboolture Park a
>
notice in the following terms: "Pursuant to the directon of the Honourable Mr 1 I. I I - ' Justice Ryan made 9th August 1989, the first respondent hereby gives notice to the applicant that, whereas on 7th, 8th and 9th August 1989 there was no appearance on behalf of the applicant at the trial of this matter;
(a)
The further hearing of this matter has been adjourned to not before 12 noon on Thursday 17th August 1989 at the Federal Court of Australia, 450 L1 t tle Bourke Street, Melbourne, at which time and place the applicant may cause an appearance to be entered on its behalf;
(b)
At the said time and place the Court may, and in default of appearance on behalf of the applicant, will pursuant to Order 32 rule 2(l)(c) of the Federal Court Rules enter judgment dismissing the action by the applicant against the first respondent together with an order that the applicant pay the first respondent's costs and together with such other order as to the Court may seem just;
(C) At the said time and place the first respondent/cross claimant White Industries (Qld) Pty Limited wlll apply for judgment on its cross-claim together with costs."
That notice was duly served on 9 August 1989 at the registered office of Caboolture Park, but there was again no appearance on behalf of Caboolture Park at the resumed hearing in Melbourne on 17 August. Accordingly, I then acceded to wIQts motion and ordered that there be ludgment for WIQ on Caboolture Park's application with costs, including any reserved costs. It therefore remained for the
claim. Court to consider WIQrs application for ludgment on its cross-claim together with the costs referable to that cross- By paragraph 25 of its amended defence and cross-claim WIQ alleges that there became due to it by Caboolture Park $16,422,933.26 pursuant to progress certificates issued by Caboolture Park's architect, Lynch & Blow Pty. Ltd. ("Lynch &
low"). ~t is then pleaded in paragraph 30 that there is also
due to WIQ a further amount of $4,208,929.19 representing the value of work carried out on the shopping centre but not certified by Lynch & Blow whose retainer was terminated on 17 December 1986.
Particulars of the calculation of that amount are set out in annexure "C" to the cross-claim which, as amended, is divided into four parts as follows:
A. Original Sub-Contract Lettings
Particulars were given of twelve separate sub-contracts
let within trade packages 6, 14, 15, 20, 22, 32, 33 and37 for which claims had been submitted on identified
variation Orders ("VOs") of WIQ amounting to
$622,484.27.
B. Additional Works to Packages
Particulars were given under this heading of claims
made and credits allowed to Caboolture Park, each again
identified by V0 and referable to a particular trade
package, the net total of which amounted to $3,280,380.52. C. Eagle Concrete
It was indicated under this heading that "Eagle
Concrete has submitted a claim for approximately$30,000.00".
D. Contract Value Claim Under this heading particulars were given of work done under six separate trade packages havlng a total value of $276,064.40. Of the amounts comprised in that sum it was said:
"The amounts listed above are calculated by subtracting the 'certified payment' amount in respect of each package in progress certificate 13(a) from the 'adjusted P.C.' amount for that package referred to in progress certificate 13(a) ."
It is alleged in paragraph 31 that Caboolture Park has agreed that the value of part of the work referred to in paragraph 30 is represented by the sum of $2,652,951.53. A further claim for an amount of approximately $500,000 as the value of extra work carried out by WIQ is made in paragraph 32 of the cross-claim. A claim is then made for $100,000 belng the balance of the target fee of $350,000 referred to in the letter of 12 September 1985. Finally, in paragraph 34, it is alleged that an amount of $250,596.80 was due to WIQ as interest at the rate of 17% per annum pursuant to the
have been pald to WIQ by Caboolture Park on account of its building contract. The sum of $16,561,287.38 is alleged to liability under the building contract. WIQ's cross-claim is then quantified in an amount of $4,921,171.87 in this summary which appears as paragraph 36 of the pleading: "36. In the premises there is now due and owing by the Cross-Respondent t o the Cross-Claimant $4,921,171.87 calculated as follows:-
(a)
$100,000.00 for fee, pursuant to paragraph 33 hereof;
(b)
$16,422,933.26 pursuant to paragraph 25 hereof;
(c)
$4,208,929.19 pursuant to paragraph 30 and/or 31 hereof;
(d) $500,000.00 pursuant to paragraph 32 hereof; (e) $250,596.80 pursuant to paragraph 34 hereof;
(f)
Less $16,561,287.38 pursuant to paragraph 35 hereof ."
paragraph 33 of WIQ's amended defence and cross-claim
alleges that:
"Further: -
(a) pursuant to paragraph 15(f) hereof, the fee of $350,000 is now due and owing by
[Caboolture Park] to [WIQ] ; (b) the progress certificates mentioned in paragraph 25 hereof include $250,000.00 for the said fee."
It has been indicated in the course of written submissions which were introduced to the Court on behalf of WIQ on 17 August 1989, that WIQ does not press its claim to an additional fee above the $250,000 already paid by Caboolture Park on the progress certificates. Accordingly, no
amount. is allowed to WIQ in respect of the sum of $100,000 claimed in sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph 36 of its amended
defence and cross-claim.Paragraph 25 of WIQ's amended defence and cross-claim contains the allegation that:
"There became due and owing by [Caboolture Park] to [WIQ] $16,422,933.26 pursuant to progress certificates issued by the architect and presented to [Caboolture Park] pursuant to Clause 10.07 of the [building contract]. Particulars of the calculation of the said sum are contained in annexure 'A' hereto."
By paragraph 14 of its amended answer to WIQ'S cross- claim, Caboolture Park has pleaded:
"As to the facts alleged in paragraphs 25, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 and 36 of the Cross-Claim, the Cross- Respondent
(a) admits and alleges that moneys became due and payable by it to the Cross-Claimant, the extent of the indebtedness which the Cross- Respondent admits and alleges being as particularized in paragraph 15 of the Further and Better Particulars to the Amended Statement of Claim delivered by the Cross- Respondent to the Cross-Applicant."
I take that reference to paragraph 15 of the further and better particulars to be to further and better particulars of paragraph 15 of the amended statement of claim which were contained in paragraph 8 of a document apparently delivered in or about June 1987 but not filed until 29 June 1988.
Paragraph 8 of those further and better particulars commences as follows:
"8. Under paragraph 15:-
Particulars as requested are set out hereunder. In each case the authorisations were written and were contained in contract variation forms delivered to the Respondent by Lynch & Blow Pty Ltd - Architects
on behalf of the Applicant as described below:-
VARIATION DESCRIPTION OF AMOUNT CONTRACT CLAIM NO. NATURE OF WORKS APPROVED VARIATION
$ CERTIFICATE
NO.,t
Then follow seven pages giving details in the appropriate columns of approved variations totalling $2,533,612.90. After the statement of that total occurs this recital:
"From the amount of $2,533,612.90 is to be deducted back charges to White Industries (Qld) Pty Limited particulars of which are as follows:-"
Similar details are then given over the next two pages of approved variations by which specified amounts were to be credited to Caboolture Park and the further and better particulars conclude as follows:
"Total amount of back charges to
White Industries (Qld) Pty
Limited equals $ 57,953.97 Therefore the total amount of variations authorised by the
applicant amount to $2,475,658.93 The variation requests and the contract variation certificates are available for inspection at the offices of the Solicitors acting on behalf of the applicant, Messrs Flower & Hart."
There is no specific traverse or other denial of the allegation that $16,422,933.26 was due and owing to WIQ pursuant to progress certificates issued by Lynch & Blow. Accordingly, I regard WIQ's claim that $16,422,933.26 is due to it under those progress certificates, as having been admitted by Caboolture Park subject to its allegations of breach of contract or negligence against WIQ, with'which I deal later in these reasons.
In the final version of its much amended reply and answer to cross-claim, Caboolture Park has made various allegations of negligent administration by WIQ as a result of which, it is pleaded, provisional sums were increased and variation claims were inflated to unreasonable levels or unnecessarily incurred.
I have set out trade package by trade package in the Schedule to these reasons the claims made by WIQ in paragraph 30 of its amended defence and cross-claim and the particulars thereof provided in annexure "C" to that pleading. The Schedule identifies each request for variation to budget
("RVB") so particularized, the amount (if any) in which
Caboolture Park admits the quantum of each claim, the amount (if any) which I have allowed in respect of that claim, and . states, in a summary way, my reasons for allowing, or disallowing (in whole or in part) that claim.
Specific denials of liability on particular aspects of
WIQ1s cross-claim commence at paragraph 20 of caboolture!
alleged that:
Park's amended reply and answer. By that paragraph, it is
"It was an implied term of the said agreement that the Cross-Respondent would not be liable in any circumstances for the items of work within the scope of works of a subcontract let by the Cross- Respondent but for which the Cross-Claimant claims in addition to the relevant sub-contract
sum. It
The resolution of the issue raised by this allegation requires construction of a number of sub-contracts and the
interpretation of drawings and specifications which form part of, or are incorporated by reference in, those sub-contracts.
By way of framing its case on that issue, Caboolture Park has identified in the particulars to paragraph 20 numerous variations claimed by WIQ as comprehending items of work allegedly within the "scope of works" of a particular subcontract and therefore, according to Caboolture Park, forming part of the consideration for the sub-contract price.
In the course of considering individually the RVBs and the variation orders (VOs) comprised within them which have been raised in relation to particular trade packages, I have indicated in the Schedule to these reasons a finding that the work involved was either within, or not within the scope of a particular sub-contract.
BY paragraph 21 of the amended reply and answer it is
alleged that: "In the case of those subcontracts and items of work described below the Cross-Applicant has claimed against the Cross-Respondent the whole of the subcontract price but has not performed or procured the performance or completion of the items of work in such subcontracts to the extent described below:-"
In summarising my findings in the Schedule, I have indicated in respect of work as to which this issue has been raised, and which was within the scope of a particular sub-contract, whether it was performed or completed by the relevant sub- contractor.
BY paragraph 23 of the amended reply and answer, it is alleged that WIQ was in breach of its contractual obligation to exercise due care and skill in the execution of the works and to use materials and workmanship for the purpose for which they were required and consistent with the nature and character of that part of the works for which they were used. As a result of those breaches, it is alleged, items of work by way of rectification became necessary, the cost of which should have been borne by WIQ or charged to the subcontractor responsible for the relevant defect, and should not have been claimed from Caboolture Park as the value of a variation. Items of alleged rectification are grouped in the particulars to paragraph 23 under variation claim numbers. In examining variation claims package by package, I have indicated in the Schedule in respect of each claim as to which this issue has been raised by paragraph 23 a finding of whether it involved rectification of defective or negligent work by WIQ or one or other of its sub-contractors.
paragraph 24 of the amended reply and answer raises an during the hearing. However, in the events which happened, I
issue which was the subject of much evidence and discussion
did not have the benefit of final submissions from Counsel for Caboolture Park on that issue for which, in the reasons which follow and in the schedule, I have adopted the shorthand expression "preliminaries". In essence, the resolution of that issue turns on whether the reference to "preliminaries" in c1.15.03 of the building contract, reproduced at p.3 of these reasons, cast an obligation on WIQ to meet, out of the sum of $1,050,000, items of expenditure
such as the cost of temporary access roads, craneage, attendant labour, materials testing and the provision of site sheds, all of which were said by Caboolture Park to be comprehended within the term "preliminaries" as customarily used in the building industry.
In my view the amount of $1,050,000 allocated to "preliminaries" in c1.15.03 of the building contract was not a fixed sum out of which WIQ was required to meet all costs of a specified kind whatever their amount. Rather, it was a budget or estimate in respect of a category of expenses, the broad nature of which the parties understood but which they found unnecessary to define with precision because the building contract clearly contemplated that the ultimate cost to be borne by Caboolture Park would not be affected by how a particular expense might be allocated between provisional sums, variations and "preliminaries". The amount of $1,050,000 was simply a component in the "target" sum by reference to which WIQ's "fee' was to be adjusted up or down
of 12 September 1985 incorporated in the building contract. from the "target" of $350,000 in accordance with the letter
' I ' This view of the operation of the buildlng contract is I : I I -
reinforced by the fact that many of the sub-contracts on which provisional sums in c1.15.03 were based required the provision of craneage, scaffolding, attendant labour, small tools, progressive cleaning and the like, all of which Caboolture Park contended should be borne by WIQ even if, in
total, their cost exceeded $1,050,000. However, c1.4.03 of the building contract made applicable to those provisional sums the provisions of c1.10.27.03. That sub-clause in turn stipulated:
In the case of Provisional Sums to which paragraph 4.03.03 applies then, unless otherwise provided or agreed, work carried out to which that paragraph applies shall be valued as a Variation and any difference between such value and the particular Provisional Sum shall be added to or deducted from the Contract Sum as the case may require."
The valuation as a variation of work comprised in a provisional sum thus attracted the operation of c1.10.18.03 which expressly required the Architect, in making the valuation, to have regard to, amongst other things:
"10.18.03 the amount of hire charges in respect of constructional plant including but not limited to all plant, scaffolding, formwork and the like of whatsoever nature used on the work in accordance with such hiring rates and conditions as may be agreed upon between the Builder and the Architect or, in the absence of such an agreement, in accordance with such rates and conditions as may be
That mechanism for adjusting provisional sums expressly determined by the Architect;" contradicts the notion that expenditure on items such as craneage and scaffolding was provided for once and for all by
the allowance of $1,050,000 for "preliminaries".Another indication which supports the construction which I have adopted of the building contract is that the contract was subsequently administered consistently with that
construction. For example, many items which Caboolture Park by its pleadings and in the course of the hearing contended were preliminaries to be borne by WIQ, even if they exceeded in total $1,050,000, were the subject of approved RVBs issued by Mr McAlllster or another on-site representative of Caboolture Park. As well, the expenditure of the full amount of $1,050,000 on "preliminaries" was certified by Lynch & Blow in progress certificates.
In respect of some claims contained in VOs submitted by wIQ, Caboolture Park contended, by paragraph 25 of its reply and answer, that "in the case of those subcontracts and items of work listed below [WIQI has claimed against [Caboolture park] sums in excess of the fair and reasonable cost of the work". In reviewing WIQ's claims package by package in the Schedule I have indicated whether or not I regard the quantum of wIQ's claim in respect of each such item as reasonable or excessive.
By paragraph 27 of the amended reply and answer, it is
which was deleted from the work which WIQ was required to alleged that, in respect of each item there particularized perform or was incompletely performed by WIQ, an insufficient credit was allowed to Caboolture Park. The summary treatment in the Schedule of this allegation indicates whether or not a credit was properly allowable in respect of each relevant item, and, if so, what was a reasonable amount to be allowed.
BY paragraph 30 of the amended reply and answer, Caboolture Park has contended that, in respect of work let to each of six specified sub-contractors on the basis of a "schedule of rates", WIQ misapplied the relevant schedules of rates so that excessive amounts were allowed to the sub- contractors concerned. Those excessive amounts, it is contended, should be disregarded in valuing the work for which WIQ is entitled to be paid under the building contract. In the Schedule I have dealt with this issue by indicating whether a misapplication of the relevant schedule of rates has been proved, and, if so, the amount which should have been allowed to Caboolture Park by WIQ had the misapplication not occurred.
Paragraphs 31, 32, 33 and 34 of the amended reply and answer in.combination allege a failure by WIQ to exercise due care and skill "in the co-ordination and execution of all construction means, methods, techniques, sequences and procedures for the performance of the works". As a result of failure to co-ordinate, it is alleged in paragraph 3 4 , costs
were incurred by WIQ for which Caboolture Park is not liable under the building contract. The issue raised by these paragraphs is resolved in the Schedule by indicating whether work was done out of sequence as a result of a design change, or other exigency outside the control of WIQ, or on the other hand was attributable to an improper sequence or other departure from proper practice by WIQ on one or more of its sub-contractors.
Finally, by paragraph 35 of the amended reply and answer, it is pleaded that particular items of work performed by one sub-contractor and properly claimable by him as a variation, were within the scope of work required to be performed by another sub-contractor. Accordingly, so it is contended, the cost of that work should have been "back- charged" by WIQ agalnst the second sub-contractor, described as the "sub-contractor to be backcharged". This issue is considered in the Schedule by reference to a finding as to whether the work was within the scope of the sub-contract of the sub-contractor to be backcharged. Where the work has been found to have been necessitated by a deslgn change, that is indicated.
If, by the time of Caboolture Park's non-appearance on
9 August 1989, no evidence had been adduced in respect of a
particular item of work identified in the reply and answer to cross-claim, that item, as a general rule, has not been accorded specific treatment in the Schedule to these reasons.
In the light of my examination of the claims made in respect of work allegedly performed by WIQ but not certified by Lynch & Blow and the defences raised to those claims on behalf of Caboolture Park, for the reasons adumbrated in the Schedule, I find that WIQ has established an entitlement on ~ t s cross-claim to an amount of $3,114,794.14 comprised of the following amounts attributable to each of the packages examined in the Schedule:
PACKAGE NO. AMOUNT ALLOWED
TOTAL 3 , 1 1 4 , 7 9 4 . 1 4
WIQfs claim for approximately $500,000 as the value of extra work is expressed in these terms in paragraph 32 of its amended defence and cross-claim:
"Further, pursuant to Clauses 4.03.03 and 10.27.03 of the said agreement there became due and owing by the Cross-Respondent to the Cross-Claimant the further sum of approximately $500,000.00 as the value of work carried out by the Cross-Claimant. Particulars of the calculation of this amount will be provided."
In providing particulars of paragraph 32 of its defence and cross-claim, WIQ recited that it had estimated the average cost to it of "its labour in supervising variations and assessing variations. It has also calculated photocopying costs and other costs associated with the variations. These estimates and calculations with application to each variation to each Subcontract package are set out in Schedule 4 hereto."
Schedule 4 provided costings of the average time spent on supervision of each "section" or subcontractor's variation claim by Mr Rickards (WIQ's Site Manager), Mr Mason (the Site Co-ordinator), a foreman, a labourer, an administrator/quantity
to $124.13 per section. Similarly, mr Rickards' time in surveyor, an accounts clerk and a typist. That costing amounted assessing variations other than labour was costed at $20.79 for half an hour being the average time spent by him in assessing each such variation. For assessing each labour variation the average time spent by Mr Rickards and Mr Mason was claimed to be one hour each, and that spent by a foreman was claimed to be three hours. In total that time was costed at $169.30 per
section. As well, a claim of $1.00 per sheet was made for photocopying. As so particularized, WIQrs total clalm for extra work amounted to $363,203.79.
By way of defence to that claim, Caboolture Park has pleaded in paragraph 29 of its amended reply and answer that the items claimed by WIQ were within the scope of, or met the description of "preliminaries" in c1.15.03 of the building agreement and:
"(b) Denies that the amounts clalmed therein were or are provisional sums. (C) Denies that the items of work are claimable pursuant to the provisions of clauses 4.03.03 and
10.27.03 of the said agreement.(d) Says that clause 15.03 of the agreement provided that the total sum payable by the Cross- Respondent to the Cross-Applicant in respect of preliminaries was $1,050,000.00.
I c- (e) Denies that it is liable in respect of the ! l items of work and/or sums set out in the further
I ! , and better particulars of paragraph 32. (f) Further or alternatively the cross-
respondent:-(i) says that the cost of labour charged by way of extra preliminaries was excessive and
unreasonable; (ii) says that the proper cost of such labour, calculated upon the same unit method as per cross-applicant's claim is:-
PERSONNEL AVG. TIME REVISED CL.10.18 AVG .
PER SECTION RATE 50% MARKUP SECTION
T. Rickards 0.1 hrs 25.00 12.50 3.75 T. Mason 1.0 hrs 20.00 10.00 30.00 Foreman 0.3 hrs 14.00 7.00 6.30 Labourer 0.05 hrs 10.66 5.33 0.80 Administrator/ Quantity Surv. 2.00 hrs 19.00 9.50 57.00 Accounts Clerk 0.13 hrs 10.00 5.00 4.50 Typist 0.05 hrs 10.00 5.00 0.75
TOTAL 103.10
Photocopying 25c per page Reasonable cost of photocopying $2,715.75 (iii) admits that, if the cost of labour and associated costs charged by way of extra preliminaries is claimable against the cross-respondent, which is denied, it is liable to pay, by way of extra preliminaries an amount equal to the proper unit rate multiplied by the hours actually spent in supervision and assessment in respect of each variation to the head contract concerned."
It follows from my earlier analysis of the contractual operation of the concept of "preliminaries" that WIQ was not obliged to meet the cost of supervising and assessing the value of variations out of its own pocket after receiving the sum of $1,050,000 attributable to preliminaries in c1.15.03.
Whether the variations which have been processed by WIQ were in respect of work for which a provisional sum was stipulated by c1.15.03 of the building contract, or whether they were "true" variations of the kind contemplated by c1.10.16, they still had to be valued in accordance with c1.10.18 which provided:
"10.18 Where the valuation of the work involved in a Variation has not been agreed as provided in Clause 10.16, the Architect may nevertheless instruct the Builder to proceed with that work and the Builder shall keep and present in such form as the Architect may require a proper record of the cost of the work together with supporting evidence. The Architect shall determine the value of the work involved
in the Variation and in so doing shall
have regard to the following:10.18.01 the amount of wages and allowances paid or payable by the Builder at the rates obtaining on the Site at the time as established by the Builder to the satisfaction of the Architect or at such other rates as may be approved by the Architect;
10.18.02 a percentage as stated in Item P of the Appendix of the wages paid or payable under paragraph 10.18.01 or if no such percentage be stated in the Appendix the amount paid or payable by the Builder in accordance with any statute or award applicable to day labour additional to and in respect of the wages paid or payable under paragraph 10.18.01;
10.18.03 the amount of hire charges in respect of constructional plant including but not limited to all plant, scaffolding, formwork and the like of whatsoever nature used on the work in accordance with such hiring rates and conditions as may be agreed upon between the Builder and the Architect or, in the absence of such an agreement, in accordance with such rates and conditions as may be determined by the Architect;
10.18.04 the amount or amounts properly paid to sub-contractors where sub-contracting of the work involved in the Variation or any part thereof has been authorised by the Architect;
10.18.05 the actual cost to the Builder at the Site of all materials supplied and required for the work; and
10.18.06 any delay costs and expenses. To the value of the work so determined there shall be added a percentage as stated in Item N of the Appendix as the rate for non-time related Preliminaries and a percentage as stated in Item 0 of the Appendix as the rate for overhead and
pro£ i t. "
Items N and 0 were struck out of the Schedule to the building contract, while item P recited "P. Percentage of wages 10.18.02 50%". The work of supervising a variation and assessing it was clearly work "involved in" the variation within the prefatory words of c1.10.18 and so fell to be valued in accordance with that sub-clause. It is proper in making that valuation to have regard to the wages, or salaries, and allowances payable to the supervisory personnel concerned and to the 50% surcharge fixed by item P of the Schedule.
The particulars provided by WIQ show the actual salaries, including, where applicable, allowances, bonuses and company car costs payable in respect of Messrs. Rickards and Mason, the three site foremen, Mr Norton who was the administrator/quantity surveyor, and to the accounts clerk. Mr Norton who compiled those particulars has sworn that the quoted labour costs are accurate. He has also deposed to his belief that the average time estimates and the details in the particulars of photocopying and other costs are reasonable.
The labour costs claimed for a labourer and a typist appear to be consistent with rates for those or similar categories of labour which were instanced in oral evidence during the hearing. The rate of $1 per page for photocopying is the same as that prescribed from 1986 for costing purposes by the Second Schedule to the Rules of this Court.
In the light of all the matters which I have just reviewed, I find that WIQ has proved its claim for these extra costs, and I allow it the full amount claimed of $363,203.79.
Clause 10.08 of the building contract provides:
"Should the Architect fail to issue a Progress Certificate to the Builder according to and within the period stated in Clause 10.02 or should the Proprietor fail to pay to the Builder the amount of any Progress Certificate as provided in Clause 10.07 the Builder shall be entitled to interest at the rate stated in Item K.l of the Appendix on the amount to which he was entitled from a date fifteen (15) days after the receipt by the Architect of a claim for such Progress Certificate properly made in accordance wlth Clause 10.01 until the date of payment of the same to the Builder by the Proprietor provided that where in respect of Clause 10.07 a period of more or less than five (5) days is stated in Item J of the Appendix and/or where the Builder holds such Progress Certificate for more than one day before presenting it to the Proprietor such fifteen (15) days shall be increased or decreased accordingly."
Item K in the Schedule is in these terms:
"K.1 Progress Certificates and
10.08 19%
K.2 Final Certificate 11.11 19%"
Item J specifies fourteen days as the period for payment of
progress certificates.
WIQ has invoked c1.10.08, as well as the power to award interest conferred on the Court by statute, in claiming:
"Interest at 19% pursuant to the said agreement or pursuant to Section 51A of the Federal Court of Australia Act 1975 or Section 72 of the Common Law Practice Act 1867-1981 (Queensland)."
Paragraph 34 of WIQ's defence and cross-claim is as
follows :
"Further, as at 20th March 1987, there was due and owing by the Cross-Respondent to the Cross- Claimant $250,596.80 for interest at 19% pursuant to the said agreement. Particulars of the calculation of the amount are contained in annexures 'G' and 'A' hereto."
That claim for interest has not been specifically denied by Caboolture Park, and, since Mr Norton has in his affidavit of
16 August 1989 sworn to the accuracy of Annexure "H" to the
cross-claim containing details of certificates by Lynch & Blow and payments by Caboolture Park, I allow the claim for interest to 20 March 1987 in the full amount claimed of
Section 51A(1) of the Federal Court Act which commenced on 22 November 1984 provides:
"In any proceedings for the recovery of any money (including any debt or damages or the value of any goods) in respect of a cause of action that arises after the commencement of this section, the Court or a Judge shall, upon application, unless good
cause is shown to the contrary, either- (a)
order that there be included in the sum for which judgment is given interest at such rate as the Court or the Judge, as the case may be, thinks fit on the whole or any part of the money for the whole or any part of the period between the date when the cause of action arose and the date as of which judgment is entered; or
(b)
without proceeding to calculate interest in accordance with paragraph (a), order that there be included in the sum for which judgment is given a lump sum in lieu of any such interest."
Sub-section (2) of the same section expressly stipulates that s.51A(1) does not authorize, amongst other things, the giving of interest upon interest. I therefore consider that there should be included in the sum for which judgment is given on WIQ'S cross-claim (excluding the amount of $250,596.80 representing interest on unpaid certificates to 20 March 1987), interest from 21 March 1987 until the date of judgment. I also consider 19% per annum to be an appropriate rate of interest since that is the rate agreed by WIQ and Caboolture Park in the building contract. Moreover, the rate prescribed pursuant to the Penalty Interest Rates Act 1983 (Vic) from 1 February 1990 was 19.6% and has averaged, since March 1987, approximately 14.1%.
In the result, therefore, there must be judgment for
WIQ on its cross-claim in the sum of $5,521,652.61 made up as
follows:
Due pursuant to progress certificates
issued by Lynch & Blow
Due for additional work within trade
packages not certified by Lynch & Blow as
allowed in the Schedule to these reasons Extra costs of supervising and assessing
variations
Less payments on Lynch & Blow certificates
plus interest on judgment at 19% per annum
from 21 March 1987 to 6 April 1990
plus interest on unpaid certificates to
20 March 1987The judgment in favour of WIQ on its cross-claim must carry costs. I have already made numerous orders for costs in favour of wIQ on applications by Caboolture Park for leave to amend its pleadings, and on other interlocutory proceedings. Neither those costs, nor the costs which, on 17 August 1989, I ordered Caboolture Park to pay on the dismissal of its application, have yet been taxed. I have now been invited by Counsel for WIQ to indlcate that it should have its costs on a basis other than "party and party" costs, that is, on a "solicitor and client" or indemnity basis. In support of that invitation, I have been referred to the following passage from the judgment of Woodward J in Fountain Selected Nests (Sales) Pty Ltd v International Produce Merchants Pty Ltd and
Others (1988) 81 A.L.R. 397 at 400: "As I said in Australian Transport Insurance Pty Ltd v Graeme Phillips Road Transport Insurance Pty Ltd (1986) 71 ALR 287 at 288, concerning this court's discretion in the award of costs:
'That discretion is "absolute and unfettered". but must be exercised judicially (Trade Practices Commission v Nicholas Enterprises (1979) 28 ALR 201 at 207). Courts in both the United Kingdom and ~ustralia have long accepted that solicitor
appropriate cases where "there is some and client costs can properly be awarded in special or unusual feature in the case to iustifv the court exercising its discretion in tgat way" (Preston v Preston [l9821 1 All ER 41 at 58). It is sometimes said that such costs can be awarded where charges of fraud have been made and not sustained; but in all the cases I have considered, there has been some further factor which has influenced the exercise of the court's discretion - for example, the allegations of fraud have been made knowing them to be false, or they have been irrelevant to the issues between the parties: see Andrews v Barnes (1988) 39 Ch D 133; Forester v Read
<1870) 6 LR Ch App 40; Christie v Christie (1873) 8 LR Ch App 499; Degmam Pty Ltd (in
liq) v Wright (No 2) [l9831 2 NSWLR 354...... I believe that it is appropriate to consider
awarding 'solicitor and clientf or \indemnityf costs, whenever it appears than an action has been commenced or continued in circumstances where the applicant, properly advised, should have known that he had no chance of success. In such cases the action must be presumed to have been commenced or continued for some ulterior motive, or because of some wilful disregard of the known facts or the clearly established law. Such cases are, fortunately, rare. But when they occur, the court will need to consider how it should exercise its unfettered discretion.
I regard the present as a borderline case.
However, I believe justice will be done if I order the applicant to pay the second respondent's costs incurred up to the end of January 1986 on a party and party basis, and those incurred later on a solicitor and client basis. For the precise form of the order I propose to adopt the words used by Holland J in Degmam Pty Ltd. (in liq) v Wright (NO 2) [l9831 2 NSWLR 354 at 359-60. 1 belleve that wording - provides greater certainty than any reference to 'solicitor and client' costs."
I have also been invited to express in these reasons some general vlews, in addition to those on the basis on
which WIQ's costs should be flxed or taxed, on the
reasonableness of WIQ's retaining, from time to time, two and three Counsel. Order 62 r.4(2) of the Rules of this Court provides:
"Where the Court orders that costs be paid to any person, the Court may further order that as to the whole or any part of the costs specified in the order, instead of taxed costs, that person shall be entitled to-
(a)
a proportion specified in the order of the taxed costs;
(b)
the taxed costs from or up to a stage of the proceeding specified in the order;
(c)
a gross sum specified in the order instead of the taxed costs; or
(d) a sum in respect of costs to be ascertained in such manner as the Court
may direct ."
Having regard to the length of time which this case occupied, the complexity of the Issues raised, and the relationship between costs already ordered in favour of WIQ and the further costs which I have already indicated judgment for WIQ on the cross-claim should carry, I consider that it would be wasteful of the resources of the Court and the parties for WIQ's costs of the whole proceedings to be taxed. Rather, I believe that it would be a proper exercise of the discretion conferred by 0.62 r . 4 ( 2 ) to order that WIQ is entitled, in respect of all its costs, to a gross sum, to be fixed by me, perhaps after consultation with a District Registrar, or to be ascertained in some other manner as I may dlrect.
Such a fixation of costs will require the submission on affidavit of the details of the costs to which WIQ contends it is entitled in the light of these reasons. By way of a guide for the preparation of the affidavit material, I make the following observations on the matters to which 1,lr Fraser has drawn attention:
(i)WIQ should have all its costs referable to defending Caboolture Park's application to the extent that it was based on fraudulent misrepresentation or misleading or deceptive conduct in contravention of s.52 of the Trade Practices Act, except insofar as such costs are of an unreasonable amount or have been unreasonably incurred. My intention is that, subject to the exceptions just mentioned, WIQ will be completely indemnified by Caboolture Park for costs in that category. (Hereafter costs fixed in the manner just indicated are described as being "on an indemnity basis".) Having regard to the evidence of Caboolture Park's own witnesses, Messrs Herscu, Briggs and Bennett, I consider that Caboolture Park, properly advised, should have known before instituting its application, or early in the lengthy process of amendment needed to torture the statement of claim into disclosing causes of action in fraud and under s.52 and to provide appropriate particulars, that it had no chance of successfully proving those causes of action.
(ii) WIQ should also have its costs on an indemnity basis where Caboolture Park was ordered to pay costs of applications to amend its pleadings and where costs were incurred or thrown away as a result of adjournments requested by Caboolture Park, because it was unable usefully to proceed with adducing evidence for the whole or any part of a day.
(iii)I consider having regard to the gravity of the allegations made by Caboolture Park in its statement of claim and to the number and seniority of Counsel retained by Caboolture Park, that it was reasonable for WIQ to have retained Mr Hunter Q.C. as leading Counsel for the period during which he was retained.
(iv)In the light of the complexity of the issues involved in what has been called "the building case" raised by WIQ1s cross-claim and Caboolture park's defences to it, it was reasonable for WIQ to have retained two and at times three Counsel. Although its representation in Court on the building case was usually confined to one Counsel that was obviously made possible because other Counsel were simultaneously deployed out of Court in taking instructions, drafting statements and affidavits, and analysing documentary and oral evidence adduced by Caboolture Park.
I certify that this and the preceding thirty-two (32) pages are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of his Honour Mr Justice Ryan. Associate
Counsel for Applicant : Mr R Perry First Cross-Respondent : Mr A Lyons until withdrawal on 9 August 1989
Solicitors for Applicant : Flower & Hart and First Cross-Respondent until withdrawal on 9 August 1989 Counsel for Respondent : Mr H Fraser and First Cross-Claimant Solicitors for Respondent : Norris Fletcher & Cross and First Cross-Claimant Date of Hearing : concluded 17 August 1989 Date of Judgment : 6 April 1990
-- -- -
-- - . . . . . .
. . - .- . --. - - --- . - . .
. . . . - -
. . . . . - . . -- - .
-- -. --- .- -
. - --
- - .
r- -. I
C I ~ L L _ ~ r r ~ . ..-J -3 .- - F . 1 - 2 !.__J :_J L__I n L, .... I , L? :-I.::; PACKAGE 1
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 05 1. Hire of packer, drott, $ 666.05 $ 666.05 $ 666.05 Baclcf ill not within backhoe and transport of scope of Lobegeier drott as per Invoice sub-contract for bulk 1654K. and detailed
excavation.2. Hire of trucks and Slab preparation and hire and transport of ramp construction not excavators for area E-2 within scope of sub- slab and area G ramp, as contract. per Invoice 1654L. 3. Hire of truck, Ramp construction not backhoe, dumpy level and within scope of transport of excavator for either Lobegeier sub- excavation/loading fill contract. for King Street ramp:
Elliott Street; A-21 ramp
and as directed generally
as per Invoice 1654M.
~ ~
c- - . . --- -.
. --
-- ! -1 r : 3 - 3 g .c3 L 3 L_I L 2 cl D i. 1.- - -, - ,---
. . -J - . I
PACKAGE 4
-
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
08 Hire of equipment as per
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 11 as
follows :J B Group letter dated
15/08/86
B & P Hiring:Invoice 502588
Invoice 502881
Invoice 502929 Similar to approved Invoice 502845 RVBts. Removal of Invoice 502536 spoil or digging out Invoice 503166 of driveway not part Invoice 503140 of SWR or Lobegeier Invoice 503230 sub-contracts. Invoice 503037 Lobegeier only Invoice 502996 obliged to carry out
dewatering during
38,174.81 performance of its
sub-contract.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM ANOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
09 Hire of equipment and
supply of labour as per
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 13 as
follows:
B & P Hiring:Invoice 700035 Invoice 700062 Invoice 700084 Invoice 700104 Invoice 700130 Invoice 700132 Invoice 700141 Invoice 502564 Invoice 502563 Invoice 502543 Invoice 502544
Amrak Services:
Invoice 63
B & P Hiring:
Invoice 503650
Invoice 503544
Invoice 503701
Invoice 503649 Invoice 502893 Invoice 700031 Invoice 700030 Invoice 700103 Invoice 700087 Similar to previously Invoice 700085 approved RVB's. Invoice 700065 Dewatering and rock-
Gregson Pty Ltd drill work for J B Group insertion of starter
bars not within scope
of any sub-contract
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Hire of equipment as per
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 12 as
follows:J B Group J B Group
J G & M G Stone
B & P Hiring:Invoice 503721
Invoice 503013
Invoice 503018
Invoice 503335
Invoice 503350Invoice 503344
Invoice 503355
Invoice 503333 The inference is not Invoice 503134 drawn that "Kango" or Invoice 503157 jackhammers were used Invoice 503182 for rectification Invoice 503184 made necessary by the Invoice 503192 negligence of WIQ or
Invoice 503204 its sub-contractors. Invoice 503087 Provision of beddlng Invoice 503361 sand part of Invoice 503173 backfilling and not Invoice 503565 within excavation Invoice 503512 sub-contracts. De- Invoice 503438 watering, provision Invoice 503395 of small tools and Invoice 503389 equipment and Invoice 503386 cleaning not within Invoice 503373 scope of sub-
32,957.83 contracts.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Hire and supply to WIQ of equipment for cleaning up as per invoices provided
with final statement as The inference is not
follows : drawn that the
Barnes Auto: repairs for which Invoice 3683 tower was hired were B & P Hiring: attributable to Invoice 700188 default of WIQ or any Invoice 700207 sub-contractor. De-
watering andJ & B Group progressive cleaning Invoice 15 as claimed not within
scope of sub-
4,267.57 contract.
- - l . . .-.. 7 --.
- l ----, 7 - -7 --
- _I -.I2 -... . l l . -.X i T m L -~ : l 5 'I - 2 L . , - , _--. ;
PACKAGE 5
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 09 Concrete supply as per invoices provided with Progress Claim 11 as
follows : Sellars Concrete: Invoice 95140
Invoice 95139
Invoice 93610Invoice 94769
Invoice 94635
Invoice 94768
Invoice 94633
Invoice 94634 A credit of $1,748.00 Invoice 94632 resulting from a Overclaim No. 8 clerical error has
been conceded by WIQ
($1,748.00) and is allowed.
Concrete supply as per in-
voices provided with
Progress Claim 12 as fol-lows : Sellars Concrete
Invoice 96340
Invoice 96059 No facts have been Invoice 95494 established to make Invoice 95851 out fraud or mistake Invoice 96607 or any other basis
for going behind
0.00 approved RVB's.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Concrete supply as per invoices provlded with Progress Claim 13 as
follows : Sellars Concrete:
Invoice 31024 Invoice 29974 Invoice 29042 Invoice 96607 Invoice 32827 Invoice 32828 Invoice 32829
Adjustment to amount
clalmed by V0 05/12
Concrete supply as per
invoices as follows: Sellars Concrete Invoice 35393 Invoice 34356
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
16 Concrete supply as per
invoices as follows:Sellars Concrete:
Invoice 29975 Invoice 34357
10 Concrete testing as per
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 11 as
follows:Sellars Concrete:
Invoice 582 Invoice 575 Invoice 560 Invoice 564 Invoice 603 Credit Note 52
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
11 Concrete testing as per
invoices supplied with
Progress Claim 12 asf 0llows:
I
Sellars Concrete:
Invoice 619 Invoice 626 Invoice 637 Invoice 615
-
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
03 Additional measured work 13,012.30 13,012.30 Caboolture Park's UD to 12/02/86 as ner attack on item 3
abandoned 12/4/89.
Provision of
compressor not within
Eagle sub-contract.
Supply of reo-chairs
not within Eagle sub-
contract. Rate for
spoon drain
trowelling fixed by
schedule of rates.
Extra cost of
"Ableflex" not
unreasonably
incurred. Rate of
$9.15 per m for edge
boards of 300mm deep
and of $8.00 per m
for formwork to edge
of tunnel not
excessive.3 8 Supply of sundry materials 177.50 177.50 Use of this material and wall sawing and not shown to have
drilling as follows: resulted from Nonporite (Nitoproof) defective work.
Master Builders (Grout and 305.80 305.80 ) Not shown to have Injectacrete ) ) been unnecessary, ) occasioned by
Master Builders ) defective work or (Masterflow and ) within the scope of Injectacrete ) 207.60 ) any sub-contract.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
Tom Pearson Note: No
(wall sawing and quantum
drilling) : issue for Invoice 20439 987.36 any Pearson 335.20 invoice Invoice 21191 343.66
Invoice 21059 1,270.29
490.15Invoice 20050 96.00 Invoice 19673 Invoice 19725 Invoice 19726 Invoice 20355
Invoice 20457 Invoice 20501
Wall sawing and
Invoice 20663 drilling necessitated Invoice 20684 by design changes not Invoice 20675 defective work, Invoice 20674 except those noted as
Invoice 21038 back-charged which were in fact back-
13,127.16 charged.
Back charge for remedial (7,177.54) Back-charge - not work to slab levels, disputed concrete pour to stair 13
and 14, rectification of
recess for Latham and
Moduline ducts (AN7788)
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
52 Additional measured work 8,661.33 8,661.33 Approved RVB as per detail provided
with RVB 06/52 (AN10368)
Provisional sum adjustment -85,528.73 (85,528.73) The propriety of this for concrete placing credit, conceded by
(AN10369 ) WIQ, has not be
disputed.
Site allowance adjustment -11,645.05 -13,527.84 (11,645.05) Caboolture Park did to amounts claimed by RVB not pursue this claim 06/10 and RVB 06/24 for an increased
(AN11489 ) credit
Hourly labour claim as per 7,187.25 0.00 ) Double claims not
Eagle letter dated ) pressed by WIQ 30/09/86 (AN13076) 1 I Hourly claim as per Eagle 5,990.55 letter provided with RVB
06/63Hourly claim as per detail
1,710.79 0.00 ) Double claims not
provided with RVB 06/64 ) pressed by WIQ ) 0.00 )
Additional measured work 2,216.48 Provision of for period 13/02/86 to compressor and reo 10/03/86 as per detail chairs not within provided with RVB 06/07 scope of Eagle sub-
contract
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
Supply and place Korodur 3,480.00 3,480.00 3,480.00 It was not disputed (Eagle claim 19) that application of
"Korodur" to loading
bay docks was extra
work which WIQ was
directed to carry outMaterials (Eagle claim 20) 660.00 660.00 660.00 ) It is accepted that
1 extra materials to
Materials (Eagle claim 21) 232.00 232.00 232.00 ) these values were
required and used.Box drain, stairs (Eagle 837.00 837 .OO 837.00 Work on box drain and claim 23) curved stairs carried
out by Eagle as per
quotation.
ME ALES
3 9 Back charge (69.20) Back charge not
disputed
46 Concrete pumping as per 6,597.33 Approved RVB - claim invoices provided with of negligent ordering Progress Claim 11 of supplies not made
out48 Site allowance 141.75 Not disputed 50 Concrete pumping as per 17,623.80 Approved RVB - claim invoices provided with of negligent ordering Progress Claim 9 of supplies not made
out
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
5 5 Adjustment to RVB 06/46 (450.00) Credit conceded by (delete Meales Docket WIQ - not disputed 3310 )
57 Concrete pumping as per 2,591.68 Basis of attack on invoices provided with quantities not made Progress Claim 12 out 59 Site allowance 159.06 Not separately
disputed60 Meales - final statement 1,384.01 Basis for reducing
quantum notadjustment established QUALITY CONTROL CONTRACTING
5 1 Contract price for topping Topping was in to K-Mart Auto Bay floor addition to previous
application of
Korodur which had to
be removed
COMPLETE WATERPROOFING
47 Contract price for fire 20,368.30 20,368.30 NO issue raised by rated jointing to precast Caboolture Park as to panels this item
- -- .- . - .. . . . - --. . .- . ... . . ---. . - . - - .. . -
. - .. --
r - m --
- 3 i_J D ,I m :.--I L- - .-, . . r- l . C7171 7, - I - . ' J ... I I.-. .
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
49 Internal floor and wall
jointing as follows:-
Docket 233308 ) Docket 233316
) Work not within scope ) of any identified
7,225.61 ) sub-contract
)
Internal jointing as per 2,628.18 2,628.18 Complete Waterproofing
final claim 25/11/86
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED ASSOCIATED WORKS
27 Supply of materials,hire
of equipment, concrete
sawing and drilling as per
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 9 as
follows:
Caboolture Steel
Fabrications:Invoice 4340
Tom Pearson:
Invoice 21137 Invoice 20962 Invoice 20952 Invoice 21021 Invoice 21015 Invoice 21017 Invoice 20987 Invoice 21222 Invoice 21224 Invoice 21144 Invoice 21146 Invoice 21147 Invoice 21179 Invoice 21195 Invoice 21198
B & P Hiring:
Invoice 502308 Invoice 502346 Invoice 502357 Invoice 502365 Invoice 502463 Invoice 502498 Invoice 502513
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Tom Pearson:
Invoice 21076
Invoice 21103 Similar to items in Invoice 21049 approved RVB's - work Invoice 21048 and equipment not Invoice 21080
necessarily required to rectify defective work
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
33 Supply of Latham joint, Work and hire of hire of materials and equipment not concrete cutting as per necessitated by invoices provided with previously defective Progress Claim 10 as work. Latham joint a follows: necessary part of
construction notTom Pearson: within scope of any
Invoice 21457 identifiable sub- Invoice 21445 contract. Invoice 21488 Invoice 21489 Invoice 21400 Invoice 21399 Invoice 21401 Invoice 21306 Invoice 21322 Invoice 21374 Invoice 21345 Invoice 21577
Wreckair Hire:
Invoice 511139 Invoice 510474
W Latham & CO Pty Ltd: Invoice 45977
Reduction in quantum not contested by WIQ
.- ..-.. . - . - - -- . - -- -- - - - -. . . . - - . - -. - - - . . -. .. .. . . - -.
. .
, 3 - - -
--- . 7 ,-1 - - -'I - I -
- r-7 . , 3 . . . . . m 1 0 - , 3 L - 1 2 L 3 L.- , - - .I . 1 ! - - .
,
, .
1
RV0 NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS
CLAIMED ADMITTED
1 I
I
4 5 Hire of equipment, supply Work and hire of of materials, and concrete equipment was in cutting services as per addition to that invoices provided with required by any Progress Claim 11 as identifiable sub-
follows : contract. Latham
W Latham & CO Pty Ltd: joint and making
Invoice 46076 provision therefor a
B & P Hiring: necessary or
Invoice 502987 appropriate part of Invoice 502849 construction. Invoice 502535 Invoice 502586 Invoice 502685 Invoice 502820 Invoice 502905 Invoice 502942 Invoice 502943 Invoice 502865 Invoice 502840 Invoice 502937 Invoice 502938 Invoice 502959 Invoice 502618 Invoice 502610 Invoice 502633 Invoice 502850 Invoice 502887 Invoice 502665 Invoice 502827 Invoice 502812 Invoice 502809 Invoice 502808 Invoice 502664 Invoice 502829
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Invoice 502917 Invoice 502914 Invoice 502847 Invoice 502603 Invoice 502853
Tom Pearson:
Invoice 21577 Invoice 21608
B & P Hiring:
Invoice 503077 Invoice 503078 Invoice 503084
Wreckair Hire:
Invoice 511885
B & P Hiring:
Invoice 503061 Invoice 503071 Invoice 503012 Invoice 503007 Invoice 503005 Invoice 503001 Invoice 503114 Invoice 503188 Invoice 503129 Invoice 503132 Invoice 503133 Invoice 503142 Invoice 503197 Invoice 503177 Invoice 503202 Invoice 503104
Tom Pearson:
Invoice 21961 Invoice 21969 Invoice 21890
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
Invoice 21867 262.58 Invoice 21914 753.50 Invoice 21877 423.84
Invoice 22023 1,624.25 WIQ accepts reduction Invoice 21864 1,024.59 of quantum by $218.45
Caboolture Shire Council
368.88
to which Pearson invoice no 21577 refers
Hire of equipment and
concrete cutting as per
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 12 as
follows : Tom Pearson:
Invoice 21990 Work and hire of
B & P Hiring: equipment was in
Invoice 503381 addition to that Invoice 503185 required by any Invoice 503167 identifiable sub-
Tom Pearson: contract and was not
Invoice 22217 attributable to Invoice 22060 rectification of
previously defective
work--
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
5 8 Supply of materials, These invoices hiring of equipment, and likewise for work concrete cutting as per hire of equipment and invoices provided with materials which was Progress Claim 13 as in addition to that
follows : required by relevant
Mitre 10: sub-contracts and did
Invoice 6738 not involve Invoice 3476 rectification of
B & P Hiring: previously defective
Invoice 700075 work Invoice 700077 Invoice 700114 Invoice 700119 Invoice 700124 Invoice 700137
Tom Pearson:
Invoice 22410 Invoice 22439 Invoice 22340
B & P Hiring:
Invoice 503489 Invoice 503479 Invoice 503502 Invoice 503538 Invoice 503548 Invoice 503593 Invoice 503608 Invoice 503654 Invoice 503617 Invoice 503555 Invoice 503697 Invoice 503699 Invoice 503682 Invoice 700036
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Invoice 700037 Invoice 700045 Invoice 700081 Invoice 700038 Invoice 700059 Invoice 700074 Invoice 502546 Invoice 502547 Invoice 502579
Hire of air compressors, Similar to items in hoses, lights, pavement approved RVB's and breakers, extension leads necessitated by extra and supply of fuel work not within scope
of any identifiable
sub-contracts.
Eagle contractual claim 30,000.00 Not pursued by W18
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
10 Variation claim as per 51,350.86 50,738.50 See reasons for measure dated 08/07/86 as judgment of 20/7/89 adjusted by WIQ see pp 11-15 letters Paks to WIQ
08/07/86
14 Site allowance 1,020.60
15 Material allowances in 35,000.00 3,371.60 Reasons for judgment connection with day labour 20/7/89 p 16 claim (to approved variations 07/02, 07/04, 07/11) 17 Backcharge for -4,302.92 rectification of Latham
recess, formwork to )
) The need for full landings 13 and 14 and
) credits has been stripping of formwork to 1 conceded by WIQ stairs )
18 Back charge for labour for
formwork to landings,
holding down bolts Level
5, cutting dowells, stairs, other
miscellaneous works.24
Day labour claim as set 14,531.00 Reasons for judgment
out in Paks letter to WIQ 20/7/89 p 25 blowing out and washing
29.08.86
1 25 Site allowance to day 0.00 labour claim, V0 07/24
- - -
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
2 6 Materials allowance to day Reasons for judgment labour claim V0 07/24 20/7/89 p 25
29 Contractual claim as per Reasons for judgment letter 16/10/86 20/7/89 pp 48-49 30 Staircase in Shop 6/47 Reasons for judgment
20/7/89 pp 26-27ASSOCIATED WORKS
23 Hire of equipment as per
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 11.
Not "preliminaries"
27 Hire of equipment as per the cost of which invoices supplied with should be borne by Progress Claim 12. WIQ 28 Hire of equipment and concrete cutting as per invoices provided with
Progress Claim 13.
Final account - associated 66.00 Not disputed works Deduct $788.50 re approved
RVB's dealt with in the
judgment at pp 15-16:
Paks claim (iii)
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 12 Supply of reo as per invoices provided in Progress Claim 11 as follows:
Nucast:
Invoice 1511884 85.19 INvoice 1511945 762.01 Invoice 1512099 2,184.00 Invoice 1512024 3,135.44 Less adjustment for overclaim in Progress WIQ concedes this
Claim 5, Invoice 1508256 -11,111.97 credit as to which no
issue is raised by
(4,945.33) Caboolture Park
Credits requested from supplier of reo as per credit requests provided
in Progress Claim 11 as
follows : Credit Request 1103
Credit Request 1104 Credit Request 1105 Credit Request 1106 WIQ concedes this Credit Request 1107 credit as to which no
issue is taken by
(255.01) Caboolture Park
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
16 Reo supplied (less
credits) as per invoices
provided with Progress
Claim 12 as follows:Invoice 1512099
(adjustment)
Invoice 1506399
Credits incorrectly
taken on Claim 3
Credits incorrectly
taken on Claim 5
Credit 1591461
Credit 3829
Credit 3830
Credit 3831
Credit 3816 WIQ concedes this net Credit 3815 credlt as to which no
issue is taken by
(765.00) Caboolture Park
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED ASSOCIATED WORKS
01 Supply of materials and
hire of equipment as per
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 1 to 7 as
follows : - Caboolture Welding Works :
Invoice 3018 Invoice 2691 Invoice 2696 Invoice 2682 Invoice 2685 Invoice 2687 Invoice 3069 Invoice 3137 Invoice 3141 Invoice 3066 Invoice 3131 Invoice 3064 Invoice 3065 Invoice 3062 Invoice 3115 Invoice 3119 Invoice 3113 Invoice 3109 Invoice 3108 Invoice 3101 Invoice 2699 Invoice 3104 Invoice 3102 (Part)
Invoice 3018 Invoice 2691 Invoice 2696 Invoice 2682 Invoice 2685
I!
I
'L- , . . .--7--..->,.. . - - . . - - .. - .- .- -- . p - . . - ----- . - ..- -- -- . - .- - - - -- . - - - - -- --. . . .- , -- . ---
. . I .
, '.: .
- , . ... : . , ! . . , . ' .. , . . . , . L , . . . ..,. , . :- . 1 ,, ., . , & . . ,
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Invoice 2687
Lyndon Agencies:
Invoice 67338Invoice 67639
Caboolture Welding Works:
Invoice 3307 Invoice 3314 Invoice 3192
B & P Hiring:
Invoice 500740 Invoice 500804 Invoice 500750
Caboolture Welding Works:
Invoice 3339 Invoice 3331 Invoice 3519 Invoice 3327
Starks Crane Hire:
Invoice 20
Lyndon Agencies:
Invoice 73336
Caboolture Drainage:
Invoice A4184
Caboolture Welding Works: Invoice 3581 Invoice 3372 Invoice 3360 Invoice 3370 Invoice 3367 Invoice 3369 Invoice 3378 Invoice 3379 Invoice 3391 Invoice 3380 Involce 3387
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
Invoice 3389 Similar to approved
Lyndon Agencies: RVB's. Movement of
Invoice 69447 reo around site was Invoice 68759 not within scope of Invoice 68464 Nucast or RMH sub-
Aquila Steel: contracts and not a
Invoice 411314 "preliminary" the
B & P Hiring: cost of which was to
Invoice 501173 be borne by WIQ.
Caboolture Welding Works: Provision of multi-
Invoice 3658 fit expansion caps Invoice 3657 was an extra Invoice 3654 recoverable from Invoice 3807 Caboolture Park
Lyndon Agencies: supplementary
Invoice 69447 supplies of F72 mesh
Caboolture Drainage & and supplies of F82 Plumbing: mesh necessitated by
Invoice 5645 late design changes.
Caboolture Welding Works: Bar chairs were
Invoice 4009 "sundries" within Invoice 4006 Nucast quotation.
Invoice 3685 Hire of equipment Invoice 3918 referable to cutting Invoice 3919 of reo required by Invoice 3835 design changes. Hire
of equipment was for
13,798.05 13,798.05 on-site cutting of
reo for blocklayers
which was not
scheduled by Nucast.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
14 Supply of materials as per Purchase of Caboolture Drain invoice additional mesh
6472 provided with 364.00 364.00 364.00 referable to design Progress Claim 1 changes. Supply of materials and
hire of equipment as per
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 12 as
follows : B & P Hiring
Invoice 5003006 185.53 F82 mesh required by
Caboolture Drainage Ove Arup design
Invoice 6974 288.00 change. Equipment
was for necessary on-
473.53 473.53 473.53 site cutting.
Hire of equipment as per
invoices provided withProgress Claim 13 as
follows : - B & P Hiring:
Invoice 503522 Invoice 503704 Invoice 503690 15.15 Invoice 503648 30.70 Invoice 502816
25.65 Hire of equipment for
Invoice 502858 165.59 on-site cutting of Invoice 700034 37.61 reo referable to
blockwork or design
324.64 324.64 324.64 changes.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 18 Adjustment to RVB 08/01 -185.00 -185.00 (185.00) Credit conceded by for double claim, Lyndon WIQ. Agencies invoice 69447
----
--! - 4-
. ., I '-1 --- 1 -- :-7 <-
_I 1 ---
. . -, - .!
- - -
,--l -
m - - : ----
1 1 :X : c 2 [-.X r7
'PACKAGE 9
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 12 Day labour claim as set 5,784.00 5,784.00 5,784.00 Claim for forklift out in Dockets 91-100 driver similar to inclusive provided with approved RVB's. WIQ RVB 09/12 obliged to provide
hoisting to landing
stage. RMH forklift
driver used by other
sub-contractors.
Trimming of column
tops not backcharged
was due to design
changes. Cleaning
out of column pockets
and keys was included
in approved RVB's and
not wlthin scope of
any sub-contract.
Cutting of rebates
due to design
changes. Cleaning
was in addition to,
and not part of, that
required of sub-
contractors under
their respective sub-
contracts. Cutting
and bending of reo
for blockwork as
necessitated by
design changes or
inconsistencies
between drawings was
properly chargeable
to Caboolture Park.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
Scabbling stairs
grinding floors and
demolition of
blockwall all
attributable to
design changes.
Grouting of lift
doors not within any
specific sub-
contract.
16 Day labour claim as set 4,234.00 4,234.00 4,234.00 Reasons above as to out in Dockets 16-22 forklift driver and inclusive provided with cleaning apply to RVB 09/16 this claim. 17 Rate increase for fixing 5,975.50 5,975.50 5,975.50 Not disputed. Re0 to suspended slabs. 20 Day labour claim for 6,396.00 6,396.00 6,396.00 Reasons above in cutting and/or bending respect of forklift reo, stripping and driving, cleaning,
refixing steel in fire cutting of rebates
stairs, cutting rebates and cutting and for stair landings, bending of reo apply cleaning, forklift, to this claim. cutting columns and other
miscellaneous items as set
out in dockets provided
with RVB 09/20
- - pp-
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
21 Day labour claim for 4,288.00 3,936.00 Reasons above in driving forklift, respect of forklift cleaning, installing mesh driving, cutting of to fire rated columns, rebates, cleaning and replacing steel to stairs cutting and bending 11 and 20, cutting of reo apply to this penetrations and/or claim which is rebates for stair reduced by $352 being landings, cutting and cost of replacement bending stair or slab as of reinforcement to set out in dockets stalr 11/20. provided with RVB 09/21.
Backcharge for (243.00)
rectification work carried ) Caboolture Park's out by I Walker employees ) entitlement ot these as per dockets, (Hair) 69, ) credits not disputed 68: (Plumb) 2278. ) by WIQ.
27 Baclrcharge in respect of
tie wire supplied by
others as per Nucast
invoices 1507712, 1508019,
1507183, 1510697, 1509323 provided with RVB 09/27
32
Rate increase for fixing 5,674.56 5,674.56 5,674.56 Not disputed by
reo to suspended slabs Caboolture Park from 13.04.86 to 12.09.86
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 33 Day labour claim for 7,396.00 7,396.00 7,396.00) Reasons above in
cleaning, rectification of 1 respect of cleaning,
rebate in block wall, 1 cutting and bending clearing away block wall
) of reo and cutting of grid 1, drilling precast
) rebates apply to for dowells, cutting
) these claims. bending mesh/bar and
) Drilling precast for scaffolding as set out in
) dowels referable to dockets 1-21 provided with
) design changes or RVB 09/33
) late information.
5. Provision of light
power and wiring
facilitites for public telephones adjacent to pedestrian ramp, level 3.
Not disputed by
11,354.00 11,354.00 Caboolture Park.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Variations as per D
Middleton & Associates
letter dated 23/10/86.
1. Provision of lighting
to display cases alongpedestrian ramp.
2. Provision of circuit
to sewerage pumps adjacent
to parcel pickup lift,
level 1 in lieu of sump
pumps adjacent fire stair5.
Variations as per D
Middleton & Associates
letter dated 22/10/86,refer:
3. Alteration to lighting
in loading dock.
5. Additional evacuation light to Coles service Caboolture Park's lift foyer, level 4. allegation of
defective workmanship
755.00 not made out.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
3 5 Variations as per D
Middleton & Associates
letter dated 22/10/86:
1. Alterations to
switchboard DB5T1/5C1
including altering sheet
metal metering and circuit
breakers for sub boards.
2. CFS on main
switchboard for medical
centre lift.4. Lighting to roof walkway for passenger lift access including two additional weatherproof light fittings and switch located on wall exiting
from fire stair 10. 827.00
Not disputed by
6,358.00 6,358.00 6,358.00 Caboolture Park.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
3 6 Variations as per D
Middleton letter dated
07/10/86 as follows:1. Supply and install two exhaust fans to Coles Coke
compressor rooms drawing
1122-52A.2. Relocate Sadien vapour light above Coles loading
dock.3. Provision of
electrical services for
roller shutter door level
1, compactor room.4. Supply and install ten additional wall brackets above barrel vaults 1, 3 and 5.
Not disputed by
3,894.00 Caboolture Park.
Variation as per D 342.00 Not disputed by Middleton & Associates Caboolture Park. letter dated 19/09/86 as
follows : Supply and install
separate time clock for
George Street lighting
circuit.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 38 Variation as per D 1,842.00 1,842.00 1,842.00 Not disputed by Middleton & Associates Caboolture Park. Letter dated 19/09/86
(refer Item 3).Alteration to car park
lighting circuits and
switchboard to provide
separate switching.Variation as per D 1,446.00 1,446.00 Not disputed by Middleton & Associates Caboolture Park. letter dated 19/09/86
(refer Item 4).Supply and install
sewerage pump alarm cables
terminating in centre
manager's office with
light and audible alarm.Variation as per D 16,244.00 16,244.00 Not disputed by Middleton & Asosciates Caboolture Park.
letter dated 19/09/86
(refer Item 5).Alter evacuation lighting
circuits for car park
areas to allow time switch
operation.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
4
1
Variations as follows: 1. Supply and install commission elecrical
Requirement for power
services to roller shutter driven door not door for Coles loading apparent on tender
dock level 1. 658.00 drawings. 2. Supply and install additional light and switch for cash hoist lift Not disputed by
room, S1 number 2652. 105.00 105.00 105.00 Caboolture Park. 863.00 SEQEB charges (additional No suggestion that to those at RVB 35/01).
excess cable charge was not incurred or
Excess cable charge was improperly Security deposit incurred. Caboolture
(Hersfield supply) Park failed to show
Security deposit that apparently
(Coles supply) were not in fact refundable deposits
7,822.00 refunded .
Variation as per D 11,571.00 11,571.00 Not disputed by Middleton & Associates Caboolture Park. letter dated 22/08/86 -
aluminium ribs to barrel
vaults
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 45 Adjustment for omission of provisional sums contained within the package as
follows:
Telecom charges and
requirements
SEQEB charges
Special mall lighting/
energy management
Alterations to shop
tenancies
Power to additional
centre signs
Stage lighting and sound
systems 15,000.00
Coles 34,333.00 Quantum of these
credits not disputed-149,333.00 -149,333.00 -149,333.00 by Caboolture Park.
Adjustment as follows: Quantum of these
Omission of electrical credits not disputed
works due to deletion of by Caboolture Park. office partitions:
1. As allowed in C W
Norris letter dated
16/09/86.2. As previously allowed at RVB 35/08.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
49 Variations as per C W
Norris letter dated
19/11/86.l.. Installation of Neo
balls in lieu of Phillips
SL lamps for use in mall
light fittings.
2. Deletion for labouronly for Neo balls not
installed in barrel vault
lighting (balance of Neoball lamps delivered to
HDC) . -2,325.00 Quantum of these
credits not disputed
-4,425.00 -4,425.00 -4,425.00 by Caboolture Park.
50 Adjustment to RVB 35/06
5 1 As per C W Norris letter
dated 17/11/86. -0.91 -0.91 -0.91 Not disputed by
1. Supply and install Caboolture Park. additional exit lights
above level 4/133 (Coles
loading dock) 415.00 415.00 415.00 Not disputed by
2. Supply and install Caboolture Park. additional exist light in passage way adjacent to
fish cool room. 415.00 415.00 415--00 3. Supply and install additional evacuation
light between mall 4 and
mall 5.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED As per C W Norris letter
dated 12/11/86. Fire proofing 1. Additional approved involved in this type fire proofing to all claim was beyond that penetrations requiring contemplated by
sealing. 3,465.00 3,465.00 3,465.00 Norris tender. 2. Deletion of labour and Quantum of this material for sealing on credit not disputed penetrations. -325 .OO -325.00 (325.00) by Caboolture Park. As per C W Norris letter dated 17/11/86. 1. Supply and install electrical services for additional air Not disputed by conditioning unit 39. 1,336.00 1,336.00 1,336.00 Caboolture Park. 2. Alter light fitting positions in passenger lift motor room as per lift machinery inspections
Not disputed by
request. 148.00 148.00 Caboolture Park.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED As per C W Norris letter
dated 24/11/86.
1. Remove and replace
power points and sundry
outlets to allow
installation of air
conditioning sheeting and Not disputed by
vinyl covering. 390.00 390.00 Caboolture Park. 2. Upgrade isolator, fuses, copper busbar including drafting and Not disputed by engineering costs. 1,781.00 1,781.00 Caboolture Park.
52 Variations as per C W
Norris letter dated
11/11/86.
1. Relocate sump pump sub circuit wiring to exterior of fire stair 12.
662.00
2. Install and connect
"mall entry" signs, level 1, 2 and 3, including
directory board, level 4. 402.00 3. Installation of lights
level 5 toilets (original -
toilet area del&ed due to
medical centre). 543.00
Not disputed by
1,607.00 1,607.00 1,607.00 Caboolture Park.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 53 Variations as follows:
1. Delete Item 3 RVB
35/32. -5,124.00 2. Add back cost relocation of switchboard 5Cl/T1 as shown drawing
8122WD32-NI. 1,358.00
Not disputed by
Caboolture Park.
54 Mains switch and fuses on 73.25 Not disputed by site office switchboard, Caboolture Park. order 53503. 55 1. Work order 53510, Relocation of labour to disconnect and temporary power relocate power boxes, boards part of level 4. acceleration cost. 2. Work order 53513, Admitted by disconnect and relocate Caboolture Park.
busbar C as per SI2372. 3. Relocate isolator and Not disputed by contact control in auto Caboolture Park. bay, order 53514. 4. Relocate switchboard Not disputed by meter and power point at Caboolture Park. shop 10, order 53515.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
5. Remove light fittings 0.00 Not pursued by and cable, install new Caboolture Park. cable and refit light
fittings, reconnect and
resubmit for inspection,
Order 535516.6. Order 53517, 47.00 Not "preliminaries" - disconnect and make safe similar to items in wiring to ablution block approved RVBts. to allow relocation. 7. Order 53518, 58.75 Not "preliminaries" - disconnect power to site similar to items in office. approved RVBts. 8. Order 53519, 47.00 Not "preliminaries" - disconnect and remove similar to items in temporary power board and approved RVB's. cable for mall 4, as per
S.I. 00142.
9. Order 53520, relocate 175.00 175.00 Not "preliminaries" -
temporary power board from similar to items in shop 1/2 to alternate approved RVB's. position, remove all
temporary supplies from
King Street supply and all
boards car park levels, as
per S.I. 2379.
- -- - -p-
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
10. Order 53521, install 173.45 173.45 173.45 Not disputed by and connect hot water Caboolture Park. systems in toilet area,
level 3 and 5.Adjustment due to -18.00 -18.00 (18.00) Not disputed by typographical error by D Caboolture Park. Middleton & Associates,
reference RVB 35/37,
$342.00 approved, $324.00
requested.Provision for Mega tower 510.00 510.00 Not disputed by (previously deleted RVB Caboolture Park. 35/31, refer RVB 35/10).
Adjustment for D Middleton (30.00) Not disputed by & Associates typing error, Caboolture Park. refer RVB 35/25, Item 1,
sum of $13,672.00, shouldread $13,642.00.
59 Adjustment to RVB 35/41, -100.00 (100.00) Not disputed by where amount claimed Caboolture Park. should be $763.00.
60 claim at RVB 35/40 -16,244.00 (16,244.00) Not disputed by
withdrawn Caboolture Park.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED ASSOCIATED WORKS
26 Associated works to 7,101.09 7,101.09 7,101.09 Similar to approved electrical as per invoice RVB - not a supplied with Progress
"preliminary" . Claim 11 for SEQEB fees.
42 Associated works to 730.00 730.00 Caboolture Park's electrical as per Telecom allegation of invoice for relocation of defective work not man hole. made out. 46 Associated works to
electrical as per invoices
supplied with Progress
Claim 12 as follows:Coles - Invoice electricity charges on handover of Super K-Mart -
adjustment. 3,188.16 SEQEB - electricity charges.
2,155.29 Not a "preliminary" -
similar to approved
5,343.45 5,343.45 5,343.45 RVB's.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
47 Associated works to
electrical as per invoices
supplied with Progress
Claim 13 as follows:R & B Sheet Metal -
manufacture of
switchboard.SEQEB - electricity
charges. 3,463.78 Not a "preliminary" -
similar to approved
3,773.78 3,773.78 3,773.78 RVB'S.
6 1 Associated works to
electrical as follows:
B & P Hiring 15.06
B & P Hiring 6.02
Not disputed by
21.08 21.08 21.08 Caboolture Park.
. . - . . . . - . . - .. . - . . . .. -- - . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . - . -. -
- - - - --F --.- -- 77 -. . ,--7
!I3 c-l ,--- ' L _ J L . _ . J -.,21 -.A - 7 . . 7 . . - .I --> ---- ---- p
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED REPLY PARA 21 CREDITS FOR UNCOMPLETED WORKS
l.(r) Provision of a 0.00 Allegations of certificate to state that incomplete the electrical contracts performance of work are in accordance with by Norris not pursued specification including by Caboolture Park. performance tests.
Assuming all items are
operated properly and no
defective work requires
replacement, minimal
testing prior to issuing
certificates would cost in
the order of $1,000.00.
Work required under page
52 of Coles specification.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED REPLY PARA 21
CREDITS FOR UNCOMPLETED WORKS
2(s) Provision of 3 sets 0.00 Allegations of of "as installed" incomplete electrical and lighting performance of work drawings, plus sets of by Norris n0.t: pursued operating manuals, and "as by Caboolture Park. built" switchboard
drawings and schedules.
As built drawings and
maintenance manuals are
required under Lynch &
Blow specification, page
0201 and page 52 of the
Coles specification. In
the event that C.W. Norris
does not have the diagrams
on file, drawings must be
redrafted and the
estimated cost will
escalate to approximately
$3,000.00 to $5,000.00.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED REPLY PARA 21 CREDITS FOR UNCOMPLETED WORKS
3(t) Provision of an -100.00 0.00 Not pursued in operational manual and evidence by P.S. wiring diagram. his Caboolture Park. figure is based on the
assumption that it is not
necessary to draft the
wiring diagram. If this
assumption is incorrect
the estimated cost of the
work will escalate to
approximately $2,000.00 to
$4,000.00. The work
contained in this item was
to be performed pursuant
to page 58 of the Coles
Specification.
- ---? ,--- >-- - - > -) r--3 -7 ---- .-F - . 7 ----
r--; '-1 2 : : -7 l --l
PACKAGE 36
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED FFE 02 ' Supply and installation of 18,909.00 16,053.00 16,053.00 Reduced quantum
detectors and associated accepted by WIQ. stair pressure controls as Provision of smoke per FFE letter dated detectors not within 25/06/86 scope of FFE sub-
contract.Variations as per FFE
letter dated 20/08/86.1. Remove installed pipe work in meat preparation to allow for installation of steel beam and reinstall plpe work to new Not disputed by
layout. 1,120.00 1,120.00 Caboolture Park. 2. Install sprinklers to Quotation accepted by Coles loading dock Middleton as ceiling. 736.80 1,305.00 consultant to
Caboolture Park.
3. (FFE 7) Fabricate Quotation accepted by offsets in 100 mm main to Middleton as allow SEQEB cables to run consultant to
in direct line. 412.00 276 .OO 412.00 Caboolture Park. 4. Relocate head in Coles parcel pickup room to suit Not disputed by revised layout. 145.00 145.00 145.00 Caboolture Park.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 5. Installation of
additional amplifiers,
speakers, tone generators,MECP controls for
independent emergency Quotation accepted by warning system to Coles Middleton as area as per Middleton's consultant to
letter dated 17/07/86. 3,905.00 Caboolture Park. 6. (FFE Item 10) Installation of additional equipment associated with retail shops and mall background music and paging system directed by Quotation accepted by Middleton letter dated Middle as consultant
30/07/86. 3,016.00 2,424.00 3,016.00 to Caboolture Park. Supply and install radio 1,260.00 1,566.00 Claim approved by microphone and associated
Middleton as
equipment level 4, stage consultant to promotions area and Caboolture Park and connection to centre not shown to be manager's office as per unreasonable. Middleton letter of
05/09/86.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 07 Install speaker cabling 1,366.00 1,182.55 1,366.00 Quotation accepted by for Super K-Mart emergency Middleton as warning system and mains consultant to and install four core Caboolture Park. screened m~crophone/mute
cable from MECP to Coles
amplifier.Variation as per FPE
letter dated 24/09/86:1. Additional work cutting, relocating and new pipe work to allow Environ to install ducts Not disputed by level 4A. 3,410.00 3,410.00 Caboolture Park. 2. Additional work in barrel vaults due to pipe work being rolled and installed to architects Extra cost referable requirements. 18,731.00 18,731.00 to design change.
3. Alterations to centre manager's office resulting in relocation of six heads and installation of three
Not disputed by
new,heads. 786.00 Caboolture Park. 4. Relocation of four heads and associated pipe work to suit new layout of level 5 toilet, adjacent to centre manager's Not dlsputed by off ice. 488.00 Caboolture Park.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 5. FFE Group letter dated
24/09/86, supply of 4 X 9
litre air water
extinguishers and four Not disputed by
location signs. 314.00 Caboolture Park. 6. Relocation of two sprinkler heads and re- running of sprinkler distribution plpe due to revision of fire passage Not disputed by
14. 290.00 290.00 Caboolture Park. 7. Additional cost of alterations to brigade booster pipe work and
supply of brigade booster Not disputed by cabinet. 278.00 278.00 Caboolture Park.
Smoke detectors to Coles 3,680.00 3,680.00 Quotation accepted by storage. Middleton as
consultant to
Caboolture Park.
Omission of provisional -8,000.00 Not disputed by sum. Caboolture Park.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 11 Variations as per:
Sheet 1
Sheet 2 Not disputed by Sheet 3 Caboolture Park.
1. Reversal of RVB 36/11 -82,454.50 Quantum not disputed
by Caboolture Park.2. (FFE V.4) Additional 437.00 Change in location of FFE Invoice 0175 manual call points
occurred as a result
of design change or
refinement. WIQ
accepts reduced
quantum.3. Invoice 02245 Not disputed by
Caboolture Park.4. Invoice 02245 Extra work
necessitated by
design change.
5. Invoice 02245 Not dlsputed by
Caboolture Park.6. Invoice 02245 Not disputed by
Caboolture Park.7. Invoice 02335 Not pressed by WIQ.
- - - . . . - . - - . . . - - .. . . .. .. . . -. - . - - .- ... -..
- - c-? -- F--- , -, .. -. -- -, - ,---. --
7 .- -_--
- , . . -. . ? -; 7-7 -7 -7 7 . . ,
- 6 -
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
8. (FFE V.18) Invoice 8,836.00 Need for 40 02245 sprinklers in
question not apparent
on face of tender
drawings.
9. Invoice 03295 20,255.00 20,255.00 Not disputed by
Caboolture Park.10. Reposition gong 600.00 0.00 Not pressed by WIQ. alarms and sprinkler heads
to suit new block wall
under FS 11.
11. Relocate gong bells 250.00 250.00 250.00 Not disputed by to allow installation of Caboolture Park. extract fan heads. 12. Invoice 03235 2,510.00 2,510.00 Sub-contract was for
specified number of
fire extinguishers.Adjustment to RVB 36/03 -1,000.00 -1,000.00 Quantum of credit not provisional sum for disputed by
plumbing done by Beavis & Caboolture Park. Bartelg. Refer also D Middleton & Associates letter dated 01/10/86.
PACKAGE 37
-
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED NATURFORM 02 1. Additional cutting to 875.70 462.00 462.00 Reduced quantum King Street paving, repair accepted by WIQ. work to maintenance
foyers, lift pavers, relay
new paving and include
cutting.
2. Cutting and laying 95.00 95.00 95.00 Not disputed by paving blocks to SEQEB pit Caboolture Park. top covers. 3. Remove existing and 1,120.20 1,120.20 1,120.20 Cross-over on construct new heavy duty ambulance centre not cross over, excavate and a "preliminary" - remove rubble from site, similar to approved prepare sub base, RVBts. reinforce and pour.
4. Fitting two man hole 140.00 Not disputed by covers, grid 20, King Caboolture Park. Street for SEQEB,
including replacing paving with concrete to footpath.
5. Weekend work for 24 351.21 Not disputed by planters on George Street - Caboolture Park. South, not accessible during normal working hours (8 and 9 November
1986).
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 6. Weekend work for 24
planters on George Street
South, not accessible
during normal working Not disputed by
hours contract 16/11/86. 542.52 542.52 542.52 Caboolture Park. 3,124.43
03 Letting of subcontract. 48,000.00 48,000.00 48,000.00 Not disputed by
Caboolture Park.TREND INTERNATIONAL
04 Letting of subcontract 78,167.00 78,167.00 78,167.00 Not disputed by
Caboolture Park.05 Drain outlets to planters 6,150.00 6,150.00 6,150.00 Not disputed by invoice 34725. Caboolture Park.
Reversing entry -30,000.00 -30,000.00 -30,000.00 Not disputed by
Caboolture Park.
ASSOCIATED WORKS 01 As per invoices supplied
with-progress Claim 13 as
follows: -Hills Fencing:
Invoice 829 3,910.00 3,910.00 3,910.00) Not disputed by 1 Caboolture park,
Invoice 828 1,122.00)
.... . A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- - - - .
........ --- ....--........ ..... .... . . . . . d . . .
---. ,.- - ;- - ?--, ,-- , - -- - C-, c 7 - 3 ---7 r 7 f---
-' '1 1 . . . . . ...
.. ., _- --- . , . . , ,.2 3: ---? .- - 2 l ! -7 ..!
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
Humes Concrete: Not disputed by
Invoice 76945 2,521.89 2,521.89 2,521.89 Caboolture Park. B & P Hiring:
Invoice 502562 362.74 362.74 0.00 Not pursued by WIQ.
Gatic: Not disputed by
Invoice 19881 1,150.80 1,150.80 1,150.80 Caboolture Park. 9,066.63
07 Concrete cutting, hire of 903.27 903.27 903.27 Not disputed by equipment and $0.80 Caboolture Park. adjustment to V37/01.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
WARD PARTITIONS ,
01 Omission of two divisions, -1,187.00 -1,187.00 Not disputed by two front panels, three Caboolture Park. wall nibs, three doors and
hardware from toilets
level 5 as per letter from
Ward Partitions dated
09/10/86.02 Delete five divisions, -2,465.30 Not disputed by five front panels, three Caboolture Park. wall nibs, slx doors and
hardware.Amendments for full height doors and partitions to floor in Coles staff
toilets.
200.00
200.00
Not disputed by Caboolture Park
-2,265.30
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED CONTRACT VALUE CLAIM
Provisional sum from
Clause 15.03
Not disputed by
CV 28 RVB 00 Caboolture Park. Less amount certified for payment in progress
certificate 13(a) 15,973.70 Not disputed by
Caboolture Park.
3,452.30 3,452.30 3,452.30
- " - -7 --- .F
, .--- <-- S---, .-- -, .---l r--1 r---- - , (7 - 7 9 .
, . .. .
.. . .. .
PACKfiGES 42 AND 44
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED IVAN WALKER 07 Site labour as per:
Invoice 1001, Sheehan
Invoice 1002, Plumb
(expansion track)
Invoice 1003, Hair, Bases for impugning General Carpentry these items not made Invoice 1004, Paine, out by Caboolture expansion track Park. Invoice 1005, Coughlan
Invoice 1006,
Kane/Oliver/Rivett
Invoice 1007, Paine
Invoice 1008, Hair No basis for Invoice 1009, Coughlan impugning any of Invoice 1010, Walker these items made out
by Caboolture Park.
Invoice 42 containing:
Docket, 1 Paine
Docket 2, Hair
Docket 3, Plumb
Docket 4, Carolan
Docket 5, Coughlan
Docket 6, Sheehan
Five sets of bolts.
- - . ,.; -, .- ... . -.- -. ---- .,. - -, -.- .-..- ,--- -- ---- . -. .-Fv - - - - --- -- - - -p-'--'- > ---.------..--- -.-
. - - - - - . .- . . .> . - , - -
- . -. ,- - I . . ,
,. -. . ~ , . , I , . . , , 1 , ,.-. . . . . L . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . ~.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED 09 Site labour as per:
Invoice 1011, Sheehan
Invoice 1012, Paine,
carpenter
Invoice 1013, Hair,
carpenter 3,846.50 Claimed grounds for
Invoice 1014, Plumb, impugning these items
carpenter 4,483.50 not established by
Invoice 1015 12,474.00 Caboolture Park. Invoice 1016, Lea, carpenter
Invoice 1017, Walker
carpenter and material
10 Site labour as per:
Invoice 1018, Paine Invoice 1019, Plumb Invoice 1020, Hair
Invoice 1021, Sheehan
Invoice 1022, site
labourers Claimed grounds for
Invoice 1023, Walker impugning these items Decking - secondary not established by
slabs level 4 King Caboolture Park. Street K levation
Boxing - secondary
slabs level 4 King
Street K levation
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
16 Site labour as set out in
invoices provided with
Progress Claim 11 as
follows :
Invoice 1030, Plumb 2.491.00 Invoice 1031, Paine
2,541.00 Claimed bases of Invoice 1032, T Sheehan attack on these items
and L Dale 388.50 not made out by
Invoice 1033, site Caboolture Park. labourer 5,616.00 Invoice 1034, Walker 1,887.50 Materials:
Caboolture Hardware:
Invoice 63606 28.22 Invoice 62963 39.85 Invoice 62389 28.17 Invoice 1024, Paine 2,384.00 Invoice 1025, Plumb
3,103.50 Claimed bases of
Invoice 1026, Sheehan 727.00 attack on these items Invoice 1027, site not made out by labourers 7.997.00 Caboolture Park.
Invoice 1028, Walker 1,422.50 Invoice 1029, contract work completed
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
20 Site labour as per
invoices supplied with
Progress Claim 12:
Invoice 1035, Walker 2,562.50 Invoice 1036, Paine 3,425.00 Invoice 1037,Plumb 3.912.50 Invoice 1038, site Work in fact
labour 7.983.00 performed by Walker Invoice 1039, Sheehan 135.00 and others as sub- Invoice 1040, Paine 925.00 contractors to WIQ. Invoice 1041, Plumb 562.50 Claimed bases of Invoice 1042, Sheehan 354.50
attack not made out ~ ~ Invoice 1043, Site
by ~aboolture Park.
labourers 5,165.00 Invoice 1044, Walker 1,708.50 Variations claims:
Referable to design
1. Jackhammer, chipback
front of building to
correct boundary line,
replace 5 columns3,200.00 changes.
2. Cut to change frames 2,010.00 Referable to design to new measurements on changes. fire cupboards 11, 12 and
13 reposition.
-
3. Remove blockwork c&. 660.00 Referable to design by saw cutter, fix to changes. grout in frame to clean- UP- 4. Form up and pour rib 908.50 Referable to design wall level 5 grid 1 and 2 changes. SUMMARY REASONS
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED CLAIMED ADMITTED
Fit 42 vanity cabinets at 420.00 420.00 Referable to design $10.00 each changes.
33,932.00 33,932.00 33,932.00
Site labour as per:
Invoice 1045, Paine 2,625.00 2,625.00 Claimed bases of Invoice 1046, Sheehan 306.00 306.00 attack on these items Invoice 1047, site not made out by labour 3,852.00 3,852.00 Caboolture Park.
Invoice 1048, Walker 2,437.50 2,437.50
Variation Claims:
1. Build up fire door 12
landing to fall to Referable to design footpath. changes. 2. Complete landing and stairs and apron out to Referable to design pathway to fire stair 11. changes.
3. Access panel to air Referable to design shaft riser. changes.
Invoice 1050, Paine Claimed bases of Invoice 1051, Plumb attack on these items Invice 1052, Walker not made out by Invoice 1053, site Caboolture Park. labour
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Variation Claims:
4. Repair to add on
decks, filling plumber and
electrical core holes. 500.00 Referable to design
changes.5. Placing of planter boxes and grates. 2,425.00 Referable to design
changes.6. Demolish and remove type A planter boxes. 1,300.00 Referable to design
changes.7. Labour to digout and form up for grated drain grid 20-21A.
2,650.00
Referable to design
changes.Site labour as per:
Invoice 1054, Paine 1,662.50 1,662.50 Claimed bases of Invoice 1055, Walker 1,745.00 1,745.00 attack on these items
not made out by
3,407.50 Caboolture Park.
ASSOCIATED WORKS
01 Ove Arup invoices for 30.00 Not shown to be supply of drawings attributable to any 06/03/86 default by WIQ.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
02 Lynch & Blow
reimburseables for
printing subcontract
tender drawings as
follows :
1. 15 B1 sheets 37.50
2. 18 drawings 45.00 Not shown to be 3. 16 drawings 40.00 attributable to any
4. 54 B1 prints 135.00 default by WIQ.
5. 30 B1 prints 75.00 05 Lynch & Blow
reimburseables for
printing subcontract
tender drawings as
follows:
6. 31 B1 prints 77.50 77.50 Not shown to be
7. 308 B1 prints 770.00 770.00 attributable to any
8. 310 B1 prints 775.00 775 .OO default by WIQ.
1,622.50 1,622.50 1,622.50
12 Back charge to Boyd att ten -332.00 -332.00 - (332.00) Backcharges, quantum
for rectification of not disputed by holding down bolts and Caboolture Park. site labour
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED
13 Back charge to Boyd Ratten -225.00 (225.00) Backcharges, quantum for rectification of not disputed by holding down bolts Caboolture Park. positioned incorrectly 17 Lynch & Blow
reimburseables:16 B1 prints landscaping
tender 40.00 40.00 Not shown to be 21 prints signage tender 52.50 52.50 attributable to any
default by WIQ.
92.50 92.50 92.50
18 As per invoices provided
with Progress Claim 12:B & P Hiring:
Invoice 503511 Not shown to be Invoice 503483 within scope of any Invoice 503545 identifiable sub- Invoice 503552 contract and not
"preliminaries".
l9 - Extension of period of insurance to 3/11/86 to
coincide with extended Extension of construction period pro construction period rata additional premium 39 not due to any
days. 2,842 default by WIQ.
RVB NATURE OF CLAIM AMOUNT QUANTUM ALLOWED SUMMARY REASONS CLAIMED ADMITTED Lynch & Blow
reimburseables for
printing subcontract
tender drawings asfollows :
9 . 12 B 1 prints 30.00 30.00 Need for additional
10. 9 El prints 22.50 22.50 prints not shown to
be attributable to
52.50 52.50 52.50 any default by W I Q .
0
4
0