In a recent decision, the Federal Court has taken a broad approach to the operation of s 40(3) of the Insurance Contracts Act 1984 (Cth) in the context of the notification of facts that might give rise to a claim for the non-compliant use of aluminium composite panels.
Category: Building and Construction Law
The Victorian Parliament recently passed the Justice Legislation Amendment Bill 2023. The new legislation addresses problems faced by parties with VCAT matters involving Commonwealth jurisdiction following the recent decision in Thurin v Krongold Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd  VSCA 226.
The Victorian Parliament passed the Justice Legislation Amendment Act 2023, which addresses problems faced by parties with VCAT matters involving claims for contribution under Part IV of the Wrongs Act following the decision in Vaughan Constructions Pty Ltd v Melbourne Water Corporation  VCAT 233.
A Supreme Court judge, sitting as an Acting Member of VCAT, has refused an application for joinder of a party for the purpose of making a claim for contribution under Part IV of the Wrongs Act on the basis that VCAT lacked jurisdiction to hear the contribution claim.
The Full Court of the Federal Court recently considered the principles governing the preparation of expert evidence in New Aim Pty Ltd v Leung  FCAFC 67.
VCAT has found that the time limits in s 5(1) of the Limitation of Actions Act do not apply to claims under s 157 of the Water Act.
In Built Qld, the Queensland Court of Appeal considered a common type of construction dispute arising under a modified version of AS 4902-2000. It is an illustration of typical issues in cases of this kind.
The claim was for variations, extensions of time and delay damages.
The effect of a very significant judgment of the South Australian Court of Appeal is that unless there is an express agreement to the contrary, ordinarily parties to an arbitration agreement will not be subject to the proportionate liability regimes that apply throughout Australia (with the possible exception of the Queensland regime).
Victorian Court of Appeal clarifies the ‘reasonable care’ requirement in proportionate liability cases
The Victorian Court of Appeal has clarified the law in relation to apportionable claims and determined that a failure to take reasonable care must be alleged as part of the pleaded claim for a claim to be apportionable.
The Court of Appeal, by majority, has held that judgment cannot be entered pursuant to s 16 of the Security of Payments legislation where the payment claim includes “excluded amounts”.
In the recent case of Leeda Projects v Zeng, the Court of Appeal clarified the principles for the assessment of damages for loss of use of real property caused by a breach of contract.
The NSW Court of Appeal has set aside an adjudication determination because the adjudicator made his finding on the basis of a reference date that was not available and because he denied the parties procedural fairness.
The Supreme Court of Victoria has held that payment claims under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) served before a “reference date” are invalid, notwithstanding a contractual deeming provision to the contrary.
An item of work in a payment claim which has not been paid may be claimed again and again as a component of successive payment claims provided the payment claim itself is valid. The limitation period in s 14(4)(b) of the Security of Payment Act only applies to the payment claim.