Grave v Blazevic Holdings Pty Ltd

The appeal before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales concerned a dispute between Mr Grave (the applicant) and Blazevic Holdings Pty Ltd (the respondent). The primary judge had refused to set aside a default judgment entered against Mr Grave. The core of the dispute revolved around the application of the *Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999* (NSW) and whether Mr Grave had an arguable defence to the respondent's claim.

The legal issues before the Court of Appeal included whether the primary judge erred in the construction and application of sections 14 and 15 of the *Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999* (NSW). Specifically, the court was required to determine if Mr Grave had demonstrated an arguable defence, which necessitated an interpretation of the meaning of "person who, under the construction contract concerned, is or may be liable to make payment" as found in section 13(1) of the Act, read in the context of the Act's purpose and object.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding that Mr Grave had shown an arguable defence. The court set aside the default judgment entered in the District Court and permitted Mr Grave to defend the proceedings. The court also ordered that the costs of the motion to set aside the default judgment in the District Court be costs in the proceedings. Furthermore, the respondent was ordered to pay the appellant’s costs of the appeal, with a stay on the costs order until the resolution of the proceedings. The proceedings were removed to the Supreme Court and placed in the Technology and Construction List for expeditious resolution of the question of whether Mr Grave was a relevant party to the construction contract for the purposes of the Act. The court also set aside a previous order concerning the provision of a guarantee and directed that any such guarantee be delivered up to the applicant. Mr Grave was ordered to serve his defence by a specified date.