Wagners Cement Pty Ltd v Boral Resources (Qld) Pty Ltd

Wagners Cement Pty Ltd initiated proceedings against Boral Resources (Qld) Pty Ltd, disputing the validity of a notice given by the Purchaser regarding a pricing notice under the Agreement. The dispute arose from the interpretation of clause 7.2 of the Agreement and the adequacy of the Market Pricing Evidence provided by the Purchaser.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the March Pricing Notice, which included a quote for the supply of cement starting two months after the date of the notice, was a valid and effective notice under clause 7.2. The Supplier argued that the quote did not meet the contractual requirements because it did not express a price applicable at the time of the notice, while the Purchaser contended that the notice was valid and that the interpretation proposed by the Supplier amounted to an unwarranted implication of terms.

The court examined the contractual scheme and determined that the purpose of clause 7.1 and 7.2 was to ensure that the Purchaser had access to current market prices for cement. The court found that the quote provided in the March Pricing Notice did not satisfy the requirement of reflecting the price at the time of the notice, as it related to a future supply date under potentially different market conditions. Consequently, the court held that the notice was not valid under clause 7.2.

The court made an order in favour of the Supplier, finding that the March Pricing Notice was not a valid and effective notice under clause 7.2 of the Agreement.