Sunshine East Pty Ltd v Cbem Holdings Pty Ltd

The appeal concerns a summary judgment entered by the District Court Registrar in favour of the defendant, Cbem Holdings Pty Ltd, against Sunshine East Pty Ltd and its director, the second plaintiff. The dispute involves an unpaid progress claim for building works performed by Cbem under an alleged contract with Sunshine East. The Registrar's decision was based on the absence of a triable defence by Sunshine East, which led to the enforcement of the payment claim under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW).

The central legal issues before the court were whether the second plaintiff was a party to the contract with Cbem, and if the statutory provisions in the Home Building Act 1989 (NSW) and the Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) could negate the defendant's entitlement to the progress payments. Specifically, the court examined if Cbem's lack of insurance or licence affected its right to claim under the statutory payment scheme.

The court found that the second plaintiff was indeed a party to the contract as the corporate agent had express actual authority to bind the second plaintiff to the agreement. There was no evidence suggesting the second plaintiff did not approve the contract, and the circumstances implied approval. Regarding the statutory provisions, the court determined that Cbem's lack of insurance did not bar its right to progress payments for non-residential work, and its lack of a licence did not affect its entitlement to payments under the Security of Payment Act. Consequently, the court upheld the summary judgment, finding no triable issues on these points.

The final orders of the court confirmed the summary judgment in favour of Cbem, ordering Sunshine East to pay the progress claim amount. The appeal was dismissed with Sunshine East to bear the costs of the proceedings.