Gambaro Pty Ltd as Trustee for the Gambaro Holdings Trust v Rohrig (Qld) Pty Ltd; Rohrig (Qld) Pty Ltd v Gambaro Pty Ltd

The case between Gambaro Pty Ltd and Rohrig (Qld) Pty Ltd concerns the statutory regulation of entitlement to and recovery of progress payments in the building and construction industry under the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld). The dispute arose when the contractor, Rohrig, served a payment claim, and the principal, Gambaro, paid only a portion of the claimed amount. An adjudicator subsequently determined that the principal should pay more than what had been initially paid. Gambaro paid the adjudicated amount but then commenced proceedings seeking a declaration that it was not liable for the excess amount and an order for restitution of the difference. Gambaro argued that it was unjust for Rohrig to retain the excess because it exceeded the total of the amounts assessed by the superintendent in prior progress certificates. The legal issues before the court included whether the statutory object of the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act was exhausted upon the payment of the adjudicated amount by the principal and whether the contractor was liable to repay the adjudicated amount.

The court found that the statutory object of the Act was to ensure that building contractors are entitled to receive and recover progress payments, and this is achieved by granting an entitlement to progress payments and establishing a procedure for resolving disputes. The court noted that the Act does not exclude parties from enforcing their contractual rights by civil litigation, but this does not mean that a party is liable to make restitution of an adjudicated amount simply because it differs from the amount payable under the contract. The court also held that the final determination of the contractual entitlement supersedes the statutory adjudication of the amount of a progress payment. Accordingly, the court dismissed Gambaro's appeal against the order dismissing its application for summary judgment and struck out its statement of claim with leave to file an amended statement of claim. The court ordered Gambaro to pay the costs of the proceeding.