Concept Equity Pty Ltd v Challenger Group Holdings Ltd

[2010] HCATrans 14

[2010] HCATrans 014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Office of the Registry
  Sydney  No S216 of 2010

B e t w e e n -

SHOALHAVEN CITY COUNCIL (ABN 59 855 182 344)

Appellant

and

FIREDAM CIVIL ENGINEERING PTY LIMITED (ABN 84 003 923 377)

Respondent

FRENCH CJ
GUMMOW J
HEYDON J
CRENNAN J
KIEFEL J
BELL J

TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

AT CANBERRA ON FRIDAY, 4 FEBRUARY 2011, AT 3.37 PM

(Continued from 2/2/11)

Copyright in the High Court of Australia

FRENCH CJ:   Yes, Mr Jackson, is there anything further you wanted to say in relation to Shoalhaven?

MR JACKSON:   Two sentences, your Honours.  The first is that the argument in the case that has just been concluded is one in which emphasis has been placed in various ways upon the statutory provision of section 29(1)(c) and the fact that it is statutory.  There is no such provision in operation in relation to the expert determination in the Shoalhaven Case.

The second matter, your Honours, is this, that nor is the approach taken in an arbitration by reference to, amongst other things, 29(1)(c) imported into the expert determination because the terms of the contract between the parties, clauses 3 and 4 of Schedule 6, I think it is, in relation to the contract specifically said this is not to be treated as an arbitration.  Those are our submissions.

FRENCH CJ:   Thank you, Mr Jackson.

AT 3.37 PM THE MATTER WAS ADJOURNED