The Owners - Strata Plan 74635 v Buildcorp Group Pty Limited

Link copied
Case Copied 10 min read

Court of Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: The Owners - Strata Plan 74635 v Buildcorp Group Pty Limited [2013] NSWCA 40
Hearing dates:25 February 2013
Decision date: 25 February 2013
Before: Allsop P at [1], [18]
Ward JA at [17]
Decision:

Application for leave to 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: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - no question of principle
Legislation Cited: Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW)
Civil Procedure Act 2005, ss56 - 60
Cases Cited: The Owners Strata Plan 56587 v Consolidated Quality Projects [2009] NSWSC 1476
Category:Principal judgment
Parties: The Owners - Strata Plan No 74635 (Applicant)
Buildcorp Group Pty Limited CAN 091 336 168 (Respondent)
Representation: Counsel:
D E Grieve QC and D Hand (Applicant)
M Ashhurst SC and M Gunning (Respondent)
Makinson & d'Apice Lawyers
BCP Lawyers & Consultants (Respondent)
File Number(s):2012/397122
 Decision under appeal 
Date of Decision:
2012-12-14 00:00:00
Before:
Ashford DCJ
File Number(s):
2012/186930

Judgment

  1. ALLSOP P: This is an application for leave to appeal from orders made by a District Court Judge refusing the defendants to the proceedings below (the applicants to the proceedings here) an amendment to a defence in the District Court.

  1. A number of issues were run in the District Court, most particularly what I will refer to as the question of service and the question of estoppel or waiver. The background to the case is that the applicants, whom I will refer to as the Owners, they being Owners of Strata Plan No 74635, entered a building contract with Buildcorp Group Pty Limited. The dispute between the parties involves disputes over entitlements to payments claimed by Buildcorp. Those competing views then find their place in the operation of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act1999 (NSW) (the "Act").

  1. Buildcorp delivered to a Mr Kokolis, the engineer to the works, a payment claim under the Act on 29 February 2012. The ten business days for the serving of a schedule in answer expired on or about 14 March 2012. No such payment schedule in response was served. The estoppel argument was directed below to what occurred thereafter from 16 March. There is no need to deal with this in this application. Mr Grieve QC for the Owners does not press the application for leave to appeal in relation to the estoppel or waiver point.

  1. That leaves what the parties debated before us as to the service point. It is said here, as it was said to the primary judge, that there was a point to be argued that the…

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read The Owners - Strata Plan 74635 v Buildcorp Group Pty Limited 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
[2013] NSWCA 40
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Owners - Strata Plan 74635 (the Owners) sought leave to appeal a decision of the primary judge against Buildcorp Group Pty Limited (Buildcorp). The dispute concerned an application to set aside a default judgment.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the primary judge erred in refusing to set aside the default judgment entered against Buildcorp. This involved considering whether Buildcorp had established a meritorious defence to the Owners' claim and whether it had provided a sufficient explanation for its delay in responding to the proceedings.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Allsop P and Ward JA, dismissed the application for leave to appeal. While the specific reasoning is not detailed in the provided text, the outcome suggests that the Court found no error in the primary judge's decision. The note regarding the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, particularly Rule 36.16 concerning the time limit for setting aside judgments, may have been relevant to the Court's consideration of the application.

The application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs.

Orders

Orders of the court

Application for leave to 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.