Legal Research
Cases
Concrete Constructions Pty Ltd v Dalma Formwork Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed)

Concrete Constructions Pty Ltd v Dalma Formwork Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed)

Link copied

Case Copied 18 February 1999 15 min read

Contents

On this page

CITATION: Concrete Constructions v Dalma Formwork [1999] NSWCA 16

FILE NUMBER(S): CA 40520/98

HEARING DATE(S): 22 October 1998

JUDGMENT DATE:
18 February 1999

PARTIES :

Concrete Constructions Pty Ltd
v
Dalma Formwork Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed)

JUDGMENT OF: Mason P; Handley JA; Sheppard AJA

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: Supreme Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 55006/98

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Rolfe J

COUNSEL: A: NC Hutley SC
R: RT McKeand

SOLICITORS: A: Corrs Chambers Westgarth, Sydney
R: Clayton Utz, Sydney

CATCHWORDS: PROCEDURE; Security for costs

ACTS CITED: Trade Practices Act 1974 ss.51A
52
Corporations Law s.1335

DECISION: Dismiss application for leave to appeal with costs

IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL
CA 40520/98
Comm Div 55006/98
MASON P
HANDLEY JA
SHEPPARD AJA
Thursday, 18 February 1999

CONCRETE CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD v
DALMA FORMWORK PTY LTD (Administrator Appointed)

HEADNOTE

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE - Security for costs - Exercise of discretion by primary Judge - Action by subcontractor for breaches of building subcontract - Substantial claim made by impecunious plaintiff - Issues arising under the plaintiff's claim and the defendant's cross-claim cover similar ground - Construction of right of set-off provided for in clause of subcontract - Meaning of agreement as to set-off favoured defendant but considered not to be determinative of outcome of application for security.
Orders:
1 Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
2 Claimant to pay opponent's costs of application.
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES
COURT OF APPEAL
CA 40520/98
Comm Div 55006/98
MASON P
HANDLEY JA
SHEPPARD AJA
Thursday, 18 February 1999

CONCRETE CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD v
DALMA FORMWORK PTY LTD (Administrator Appointed)

JUDGMENT
1 MASON P: I agree with Sheppard AJA.
2 HANDLEY JA: I agree with Sheppard AJA
3 SHEPPARD AJA: This is an application for leave to appeal against the judgment of Rolfe J sitting in the Construction List of the Commercial Division by which his Honour dismissed a notice of motion filed on 20 March 1998 on behalf of the claimant ("Concrete"), the defendant in the proceedings before Rolfe J, for security for costs. The application for leave has been heard upon the basis that, if the Court thinks the case a proper case for leave, it can deal with the appeal on a final basis.
4 The action with which his Honour was concerned is an action brought by the opponent ("Dalma") against Concrete for damages for breaches of a building subcontract. The nature of the dispute is described in the summons as a claim for reasonable remuneration for subcontract works or, in the alternative, for damages for wrongful termination of the subcontract by Concrete. Damages are also claimed pursuant to s.52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cwlth) as a consequence of misleading and deceptive conduct said to have been engaged in by Concrete and representations made by it as to future matters within the meaning of s.51A of that Act. Amongst the issues which were said to be likely to arise were the terms…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Concrete Constructions Pty Ltd v Dalma Formwork Pty Ltd (Adm... and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [1999] NSWCA 16
Decision Date: 18 February 1999

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Concrete Constructions Pty Ltd sought leave to appeal a decision of the Supreme Court of New South Wales concerning an application for security for costs. Dalma Formwork Pty Ltd, which was under administration, had been ordered to provide security for costs in proceedings brought against it by Concrete Constructions. Dalma Formwork subsequently applied to the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal that security for costs order.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge had erred in ordering Dalma Formwork to provide security for costs, despite its status as a company under administration. This involved considering the interplay between the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the rules governing security for costs, particularly in circumstances where a company is in external administration.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Mason P, Handley JA and Sheppard AJA, dismissed the application for leave to appeal. While the specific reasoning is not detailed in the provided text, the outcome suggests the Court found no arguable error in the primary judge's decision to order security for costs against an administrator. This implies that the court considered the usual principles for security for costs to be applicable, even with the company in administration, or that the administrator had not demonstrated sufficient grounds to displace those principles.

Consequently, the application for leave to appeal was dismissed, and Concrete Constructions Pty Ltd was awarded its costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Dismiss application for leave to appeal with costs

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

CITATION:	Concrete Constructions v Dalma Formwork [1999] NSWCA 16
FILE NUMBER(S):	CA 40520/98
HEARING DATE(S):	22 October 1998
JUDGMENT DATE:	18 February 1999
PARTIES :	Concrete Constructions Pty Ltd v Dalma Formwork Pty Ltd (Administrator Appointed)
JUDGMENT OF:	Mason P; Handley JA; Sheppard AJA

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION:	Supreme Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) :	55006/98
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER:	Rolfe J

COUNSEL:	A: NC Hutley SC R: RT McKeand
SOLICITORS:	A: Corrs Chambers Westgarth, Sydney R: Clayton Utz, Sydney
CATCHWORDS:	PROCEDURE; Security for costs
ACTS CITED:	Trade Practices Act 1974 ss.51A 52 Corporations Law s.1335
DECISION:	Dismiss application for leave to appeal with costs