Transcript Of Proceedings

Maxcon Constructions Pty Ltd sought to enforce an adjudicator's determination made under the *Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002* (NSW) against Michael Christopher Vadasz, trading as Australasian Piling Company, and others. The dispute concerned a claim for progress payments made by Maxcon for work carried out on a construction project.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the adjudicator's determination was valid and enforceable, notwithstanding alleged jurisdictional errors. Specifically, the court was required to consider whether the adjudicator had exceeded their jurisdiction by determining issues that were outside the scope of the payment claim, and if so, whether this rendered the entire determination void.

The court reasoned that for an adjudicator to have jurisdiction under the Act, the claimant must have made a valid payment claim. If a payment claim is found to be invalid, then the adjudicator lacks jurisdiction to make a determination. In this instance, the court found that the payment claim made by Maxcon was invalid because it did not comply with the requirements of the Act. Consequently, the adjudicator had no jurisdiction to determine the claim, and the purported determination was a nullity.

The court therefore dismissed Maxcon's application to enforce the adjudicator's determination and ordered Maxcon to pay the costs of the respondents.