Dial D Pty Ltd as trustee for the Smith Street Unit Trust v Kingston Building (Australia) Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2013] NSWCA 277
•28 August 2013
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Dial D Pty Ltd as trustee for the Smith Street Unit Trust v Kingston Building (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] NSWCA 277
[2013] NSWCA 277
28 August 2013
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Dial D Pty Ltd as trustee for the Smith Street Unit Trust (the appellant) appealed to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales against a decision of Stevenson J concerning a building contract with Kingston Building (Australia) Pty Ltd (the respondent). The dispute centred on whether the Superintendent was entitled to issue a progress payment certificate in a month where no work was performed and the contractor had not issued a progress claim, and consequently, whether such a certificate was void.
The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were the proper construction of the building contract, specifically clauses relating to the making of progress claims and the issuance of payment certificates by the Superintendent. The court was required to determine whether the Superintendent's power to issue a certificate was contingent upon the contractor first issuing a progress claim, and whether a certificate issued in the absence of a progress claim could be considered valid or was consequently void.
The Court of Appeal reasoned that the contract did not require the Superintendent to wait for a progress claim from the contractor before issuing a payment certificate. The court interpreted the relevant contractual provisions to mean that the Superintendent had an independent power to issue a certificate, even if no work had been done in a particular period and no progress claim had been made by the contractor. Consequently, the Superintendent's progress certificate was not void. The appeal was allowed in part, with the declaration made by Stevenson J being set aside, but the appeal was otherwise dismissed.
The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were the proper construction of the building contract, specifically clauses relating to the making of progress claims and the issuance of payment certificates by the Superintendent. The court was required to determine whether the Superintendent's power to issue a certificate was contingent upon the contractor first issuing a progress claim, and whether a certificate issued in the absence of a progress claim could be considered valid or was consequently void.
The Court of Appeal reasoned that the contract did not require the Superintendent to wait for a progress claim from the contractor before issuing a payment certificate. The court interpreted the relevant contractual provisions to mean that the Superintendent had an independent power to issue a certificate, even if no work had been done in a particular period and no progress claim had been made by the contractor. Consequently, the Superintendent's progress certificate was not void. The appeal was allowed in part, with the declaration made by Stevenson J being set aside, but the appeal was otherwise dismissed.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Contract Law
-
Civil Procedure
Legal Concepts
-
Appeal
-
Breach
-
Contract Formation
-
Costs
-
Remedies
-
Statutory Construction
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Maxcon Constructions Pty Ltd v Ily Australia Pty Ltd [2017] VCC 1382
Cases Citing This Decision
6
Dial D Pty Ltd as trustee for the Smith Street Unit Trust v Kingston Building (Australia) Pty Ltd (No 2)
[2013] NSWCA 295
Mackie Pty Ltd v Counahan
[2013] VSC 694
Mackie Pty Ltd v Counahan
[2013] VSC 694
Cases Cited
12
Statutory Material Cited
1
Kingston Building (Australia) Pty Ltd v Dial D Pty Ltd as trustee for the Smith Street Unit Trust
[2013] NSWSC 173
Daysea Pty Ltd v Watpac Australia Pty Ltd
[2001] QCA 49