Equinox Construction Pty Ltd v Henning

The matter of Equinox Construction Pty Ltd v Henning involved a dispute between the applicant, Equinox, and the respondents, Henning and the Queensland Building and Construction Commission (QBCC). Equinox sought a declaration that an adjudication decision made in favour of Henning was void due to a jurisdictional error. Specifically, Equinox contested whether Henning had properly served a copy of the adjudication application to Equinox in accordance with section 79(3) of the Building and Construction Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) Act 2017 (Qld).

The central legal issue was whether Henning's actions complied with the statutory requirements for serving the adjudication application, as stipulated in section 79(3) of the Act. Equinox argued that Henning failed to strictly prove that he had given a copy of the adjudication application to Equinox. The court had to determine whether Henning's evidence sufficiently demonstrated that he had complied with the statutory obligations regarding service. This included considering whether the address to which Henning posted the application was correct and whether all necessary steps to ensure service, such as pre-paying postage, were completed.

The court found that Henning did not strictly prove that he had served the adjudication application to Equinox. While Henning provided evidence that he posted the application to an address he believed to be correct, he did not explicitly demonstrate that he had pre-paid the postage. Additionally, there was a discrepancy between the addresses stated in the evidence. The court held that strict compliance with the statutory requirements was necessary to ensure the quick and efficient resolution of disputes as intended by the Act. As a result, the court declared the adjudication decision void due to the jurisdictional error stemming from inadequate proof of service.

No order was made regarding costs.