Neumann Contractors P/L v Peet Beachton Syndicate Limited (No 2)

Neumann Contractors P/L brought an action against Peet Beachton Syndicate Limited, seeking a declaration, an injunction, and damages for alleged breaches of contract and misleading and deceptive conduct. The case was heard in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The primary issue before the tribunal was whether Neumann Contractors' payment claim complied with section 17 of the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) and whether Neumann Contractors, through its employee, had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct. The tribunal found that the payment claim did comply with the relevant statutory provisions, but Neumann Contractors failed to discharge the onus of proof regarding the misleading and deceptive conduct claim. As a result, Neumann Contractors sought a costs order under rule 684 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (Qld), arguing that costs should follow the event.

The tribunal considered the overall success of Peet Beachton Syndicate Limited and the extent to which Neumann Contractors had succeeded in their claims. The tribunal found that Neumann Contractors had not succeeded in their primary claims, and as such, costs should not follow the event. Instead, the tribunal ordered Neumann Contractors to pay 75 per cent of Peet Beachton Syndicate Limited's costs of and incidental to the proceedings. The tribunal reasoned that the costs should be apportioned in this manner due to Neumann Contractors' failure to discharge the onus of proof on the misleading and deceptive conduct claim, despite their partial success on the payment claim issue.