Court of Appeal
Supreme Court
New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Keegan v Ballast Point Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCA 179 Hearing dates: 31 August 2022 Date of orders: 13 September 2022 Decision date: 13 September 2022 Before: Meagher JA at [1];
Brereton JA at [57];
Kirk JA at [58]Decision: Appeal dismissed with costs.
Catchwords: BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION – residential building contract – where general conditions of contract provided for making by builder of monthly payment claims – where special conditions appointed architect to administer contract on owner’s behalf, including by assessing and certifying builder’s payment claims – whether owner’s obligation to pay and builder’s entitlement to payment only in respect of amounts certified as due and payable by architect
Cases Cited: Beaufort Developments (NI) Ltd v Gilbert-Ash NI Ltd [1999] 1 AC 266
Costain Building and Civil Engineering Ltd v Scottish Rugby Union plc (1994) 69 BLR 80
Dixon v South Australian Railways Commissioner (1923) 34 CLR 71; [1923] HCA 45
Dunlop & Ranken Ltd v Hendall Steel Structures Ltd [1957] 1 WLR 1102
Glynn v Margetson & Co [1893] AC 351
Henry Boot Construction Ltd v Alstom Combined Cycles Ltd [2005] 1 WLR 3850; [2005] EWCA Civ 814
Lubenham Fidelities and Investments Co Ltd v South Pembrokeshire District Council (1986) 33 BLR 39
Northern Regional Health Authority v Derek Crouch Construction Co Ltd [1984] QB 644
Peninsula Balmain Pty Ltd v Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd [2002] NSWCA 211
Robertson v French (1803) 4 East 130
V601 Developments Pty Ltd v Probuild Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd [2021] VSC 849
Walton v Illawarra [2011] NSWSC 1188
Wilkie v Gordian Runoff Ltd (2005) 221 CLR 522; [2005] HCA 17
Texts Cited: S Furst and V Ramsey, Keating on Construction Contracts (11th ed, 2021, Sweet & Maxwell)
Category: Principal judgment Parties: Richard Keegan (Appellant)
Ballast Point Pty Ltd (Respondent)Representation: Counsel:
M Green SC with JC Rogers (Appellant)
G Campbell (Respondent)Solicitors:
Addisons (Appellant)
D’Arcy Sloman Peacock Lawyers (Respondent)
File Number(s): 2022/118812 Publication restriction: Nil Decision under appeal
- Court or tribunal:
- District Court of New South Wales
- Jurisdiction:
- Civil
- Date of Decision:
- 25 March 2022
- Before:
- S J Gibb DCJ
- File Number(s):
- 2020/319941
HEADNOTE
[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]
The appellant as Owner and respondent as Builder were parties to a cost plus residential building contract, which was in a standard form prepared by the Master Builders Association of New South Wales. After works had been completed, an issue arose as to whether moneys remained owing by the Owner to the Builder for the cost of works undertaken and a builder’s fee.
The general conditions of contract (clause 17) provided for the making by the Builder of monthly payment claims, which were to be paid within 10 days of the Builder submitting the relevant claim. The Special Conditions appointed an Architect to administer the contract on the Owner’s behalf. Special Condition 3 provided that the Architect was to assess and certify the…
Continue reading Keegan v Ballast Point Pty Ltd
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Keegan v Ballast Point Pty Ltd [2022] NSWCA 179
- Case
- [2022] NSWCA 179
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The primary legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the owner's obligation to pay the builder, and consequently the builder's entitlement to payment, was strictly limited to amounts that had been assessed and certified as due and payable by the architect. This question required the court to consider the interplay between the general conditions of the contract, which provided for monthly payment claims by the builder, and the special conditions, which appointed an architect to administer the contract on behalf of the owner, including the assessment and certification of these claims.
The Court of Appeal reasoned that the special conditions of the contract clearly stipulated that the architect was appointed to administer the contract and that this included the crucial function of assessing and certifying the builder's payment claims. The court held that the contract, as amended by the special conditions, made the architect's certification a prerequisite for the builder's entitlement to payment and the owner's obligation to pay. This interpretation underscored the importance of the architect's role as the designated certifier under the contract.
The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.
Orders
Orders of the court
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.