Ian Street Developer Pty Ltd v Arrow International Pty Ltd
Case
•
[2018] VSC 14
•31 January 2018
Details
AGLC
Case
Decision Date
Ian Street Developer Pty Ltd v Arrow International Pty Ltd [2018] VSC 14
[2018] VSC 14
31 January 2018
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Ian Street Developer Pty Ltd sought a declaration that a determination by an adjudicator under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) was invalid on the grounds that it was made outside the statutory period. The defendant, Arrow International Pty Ltd, was a subcontractor to the plaintiff and had issued a payment claim under the Act. The court was required to determine whether the Act applied to the defendant, whether the adjudicator's determination was invalid for being made outside the statutory period, and whether the payment claim could include the value of work performed before an earlier reference date.
The court found that the defendant was 'in the business of building residences' for the purposes of section 7(2)(b) of the Act, and thus the Act applied to the defendant. The court also held that the maximum extension of time permitted under section 22(4) of the Act is a further 5 days, not 15 days as argued by the defendant. Despite the adjudicator's determination being made outside the statutory period, the court found that this did not render the determination invalid as the requirements of section 22(4) of the Act were not jurisdictional. Finally, the court held that a person entitled to a progress payment, which is calculated by reference to a reference date under section 9 of the Act, may include the value of work performed before the previous reference date.
The court's decision affirmed the validity of the adjudicator's determination and upheld the plaintiff's entitlement to payment for work performed before the previous reference date. The defendant's application for a declaration that the adjudicator's determination was invalid was dismissed with costs.
The court found that the defendant was 'in the business of building residences' for the purposes of section 7(2)(b) of the Act, and thus the Act applied to the defendant. The court also held that the maximum extension of time permitted under section 22(4) of the Act is a further 5 days, not 15 days as argued by the defendant. Despite the adjudicator's determination being made outside the statutory period, the court found that this did not render the determination invalid as the requirements of section 22(4) of the Act were not jurisdictional. Finally, the court held that a person entitled to a progress payment, which is calculated by reference to a reference date under section 9 of the Act, may include the value of work performed before the previous reference date.
The court's decision affirmed the validity of the adjudicator's determination and upheld the plaintiff's entitlement to payment for work performed before the previous reference date. The defendant's application for a declaration that the adjudicator's determination was invalid was dismissed with costs.
Details
Key Legal Topics
Areas of Law
-
Building Contracts
Legal Concepts
-
Statutory Construction
-
Breach of Contract
-
Compensatory Damages
Actions
Download as PDF
Download as Word Document
Most Recent Citation
Nasseri v Wellington Builders Pty Ltd [2024] VSC 200
Cases Citing This Decision
16
Ian Street Developer Pty Ltd v Arrow International Pty Ltd
[2018] VSCA 294
Nasseri v Wellington Builders Pty Ltd
[2024] VSC 200
Shape Australia v The Nuance Group
[2018] VSC 808
Cases Cited
46
Statutory Material Cited
0
Colonial Range Pty Ltd v CES-Queen (Vic) Pty Ltd
[2016] VSCA 328
Di Paolo v Salta Constructions Pty Ltd
[2015] VSCA 230