Miccon Hire Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v Birla Mt Gordon Pty Ltd

Miccon Hire Pty Ltd, in liquidation, sued Birla Mt Gordon Pty Ltd for unpaid charges under a contract for haulage and waste dumping services. The dispute arose from the plaintiff's submission of monthly invoices, which the defendant did not pay in full. The defendant argued that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient information as required by the contract, while the plaintiff maintained that it had discharged the onus of proof for its claim with as much precision as the subject matter reasonably permitted. The plaintiff also alleged that the defendant had accepted the benefit of work performed under a variation to the contract, which was not documented as required, and sought payment under estoppel and quantum meruit.

The court had to determine whether the plaintiff had discharged the onus of proof for its claim, whether the defendant was estopped from denying payment for work performed under the variation, and whether certain maintenance work was included in the existing price of the contract. The court found that the plaintiff had discharged the onus of proof by showing that it had performed the services and submitted the invoices. The court also held that the defendant was estopped from denying payment for the work performed under the variation, as it had accepted the benefit of the work and monitored its progress. Finally, the court found that the maintenance work was not incidental to the contract and was therefore not included in the existing price.

The court held in favour of the plaintiff, awarding it the sum of $2,249,912.08. The court reserved the issue of costs and interest, directing counsel to submit written submissions. The court's judgment provides guidance on the onus of proof in contract disputes, the application of estoppel by conduct, and the interpretation of contracts.