Reward Interiors Pty Ltd v Master Fabrication (NSW AU) Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 1251

Reward Interiors Pty Ltd v Master Fabrication (NSW AU) Pty Ltd [2020] NSWSC 1251

For the purposes of the summary judgment application, the Court had to assume that the April Agreement was made and would bind Master but for s 34. It was at least arguable that such a compromise agreement did not exclude, modify or restrict the operation of the Act and was not an attempt to deter action under the Act, because Master had served payment claims and, on the assumed facts, agreed that its rights would be governed by the settlement. The issue was not apt for final determination on a summary judgment application, so Master's motion was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Equity Technology and Construction List; Building and Construction Payment Claim Dispute Under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (nsw) / Defendant's Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment and to Strike Out Paragraphs of the Defence to Cross Claim
Outcome
Defendant's notice of motion of 30 July 2020 dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['payment Claim' 'payment Schedule' 'no Contracting Out' 'settlement Agreement' 'summary Judgment']
['building and Construction' 'security of Payment' 'civil Procedure'] ['payment Claim' 'payment Schedule' 'no Contracting Out' 'settlement Agreement' 'summary Judgment']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Equity Technology and Construction List; Building and Construction Payment Claim Dispute Under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (nsw) / Defendant's Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment and to Strike Out Paragraphs of the Defence to Cross Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an alleged agreement between a subcontractor and builder to accept an amount less than the amount claimed in a payment claim was void by reason of s 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW).' 'Whether the subcontractor was entitled to summary judgment for the difference between the amount claimed in the payment claim and the amount paid pursuant to the alleged agreement.' 'Whether the relevant paragraphs of the Defence to Cross Claim should be struck out.']

Ratio Decidendi

For the purposes of the summary judgment application, the Court had to assume that the April Agreement was made and would bind Master but for s 34. It was at least arguable that such a compromise agreement did not exclude, modify or restrict the operation of the Act and was not an attempt to deter action under the Act, because Master had served payment claims and, on the assumed facts, agreed that its rights would be governed by the settlement. The issue was not apt for final determination on a summary judgment application, so Master's motion was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Defendant's notice of motion of 30 July 2020 dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ["Master's notice of motion of 30 July 2020 be dismissed with costs." 'The matter will be listed for directions on 18 September 2020.']