Lipman Pty Ltd v Emergency Services Superannuation Board

Link copied
Case Copied 11 min read

Court of Appeal

New South Wales

Case Title: Lipman Pty Ltd v Emergency Services Superannuation Board
Medium Neutral Citation: [2011] NSWCA 163
Hearing Date(s): 27 May 2011
Decision Date: 27 May 2011
Jurisdiction:
Before:

Allsop P at 1, Young JA at 17, Tobias AJA at 18

Decision:

1. Application for leave to appeal allowed.
2. The draft notice of appeal contained within volume 1 of the application books stand as a filed notice of appeal.
3. Appeal dismissed with costs.
[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]

Catchwords:

CONTRACT - construction - dispute resolution clause - requirement under contract that expert determination be final and binding "unless a party gives notice of appeal" within 21 days - whether determination never final and binding where notice issued.

ADR - dispute resolution clauses to be construed broadly to give effect to business purpose - parties unlikely to have intended multiple venues or occasions for resolution of disputes.

CASE MANAGEMENT - conduct of appeal - filing of unnecessary material - need for practitioners to play their part in providing efficiency of service through the courts.

Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:

Comandate Marine Corporation v Pan Australia Shipping Pty Ltd [2006] FCAFC 192; 157 FCR 45
Fiona Trust & Holding Corporation v Privalov [2007] UKHL 40; [2008] 1 Lloyd's Rep 254
Francis Travel Marketing Pty Ltd v Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd (1996) 39 NSWLR 160
United Group Rail Services Ltd v Rail Corporation of New South Wales [2009] NSWCA 177; 74 NSWLR 618

Texts Cited:
Category: Principal judgment
Parties:

Lipman Pty Ltd (Applicant)
Emergency Services Superannuation Board (Respondent)

Representation
- Counsel:

Counsel:
Mr M G Rudge SC, Mr H Bevan (Applicant)
Mr M Dempsey SC, Mr N Kidd (Respondent)

- Solicitors:

Solicitors:
Kreisson Legal (Applicant)
Holding Redlich (Respondent)

File number(s): 2009/298863
Decision Under Appeal
- Court / Tribunal: Supreme Court
- Before: Hammerschlag J
- Date of Decision: 29 June 2010
- Citation: Lipman Pty Limited v Emergency Services Superannuation Board [2010] NSWSC 710
- Court File Number(s) 2009/298863
Publication Restriction:

Judgment

  1. ALLSOP P: This is an application for leave to appeal and an appeal should leave be granted from an order in the nature of a declaration made by the Construction List judge, Hammerschlag J, as to the final and binding character of a determination by an expert appointed under a dispute resolution clause of a building contract.

  1. The relevant parts of the clause provide as follows:

" 42.10 Determination by Expert

The determination of the expert:

(a) must be in writing;

(b) will be:

(i) substituted for the relevant direction for the Superintendent; and

(ii) is final and binding

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Lipman Pty Ltd v Emergency Services Superannuation Board and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2011] NSWCA 163
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Lipman Pty Ltd (Lipman) and the Emergency Services Superannuation Board (ESSB) were parties to a contract that contained a dispute resolution clause. This clause stipulated that an expert determination would be final and binding, unless a party gave notice of appeal within 21 days. Lipman issued a notice of appeal, and the dispute concerned whether this notice rendered the expert determination not final and binding. The matter came before the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was the proper construction of the dispute resolution clause, specifically whether the issuance of a notice of appeal within the stipulated timeframe meant that the expert determination was never final and binding. The court was required to determine the effect of the "unless" provision in the context of the contractual agreement for dispute resolution.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that dispute resolution clauses should be construed broadly to give effect to their business purpose, and that parties are unlikely to intend for disputes to be resolved in multiple venues or on multiple occasions. The court held that the expert determination was final and binding from the moment it was made, and that the notice of appeal did not negate its finality but rather invoked a process for challenging it. Consequently, the court found that the appeal should be dismissed.

The Court of Appeal allowed the application for leave to appeal, ordered that the draft notice of appeal stand as a filed notice of appeal, and dismissed the appeal with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

1. Application for leave to appeal allowed.

2. The draft notice of appeal contained within volume 1 of the application books stand as a filed notice of appeal.

3. Appeal dismissed with costs.

[Note: The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 provide (Rule 36.11) that unless the Court otherwise orders, a judgment or order is taken to be entered when it is recorded in the Court's computerised court record system. Setting aside and variation of judgments or orders is dealt with by Rules 36.15, 36.16, 36.17 and 36.18. Parties should in particular note the time limit of fourteen days in Rule 36.16.]

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.