Canberra Drilling Rigs Pty Ltd v Haides Pty Ltd

Canberra Drilling Rigs Pty Ltd (the appellant) appealed to the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory against a decision of the primary judge concerning an adjudication of a progress payment claim made under the *Building and Construction Industry (Security of Payment) Act 2009* (ACT). The dispute arose from a payment claim made by Haides Pty Ltd (the respondent) for work performed under a construction contract. The core of the dispute revolved around whether the payment claim was served within the time limits prescribed by section 15(4)(b) of the Act, specifically concerning work performed both within and outside a 12-month period.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the fact that work was done within the 12-month period was a jurisdictional fact that needed to be established for the adjudicator to have jurisdiction, or if the claimant's assertion that the work was done under the construction contract was sufficient to enliven the adjudicator's jurisdiction. The Court was also required to consider whether the primary judge erred in not determining the specific terms of the construction contract and the proper operation of section 15(4) of the Act in this context.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the primary judge's decision. The reasoning focused on the interpretation of section 15(4) of the Act, which dictates the timeframe for making a payment claim. The Court affirmed that the claimant's assertion that the work was performed under the construction contract was sufficient to establish the adjudicator's jurisdiction, and it was not a jurisdictional fact that required definitive proof at that stage. The Court found that the primary judge had correctly applied the principles of the Act and did not err in their determination. The appeal was dismissed with costs.