Barclay Mowlem Construction v Tesrol Walsh Bay [2004] NSWSC 716
Summary judgment was withheld because the first and second arguable defences—whether there was a valid payment schedule and whether estoppel by representation applied—required determination on a final hearing, not summary judgment.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Barclay Mowlem Construction Ltd; Defendant: Tesrol Walsh Bay Pty Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 13 August 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Building and Construction Dispute / Summary Judgment Application
- Outcome
- Summary judgment application dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Payment Schedule Requirements, Estoppel by Representation, Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Summary Judgment Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Barclay Mowlem Construction Ltd
Plaintiff
Tesrol Walsh Bay Pty Ltd
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Building and Construction Dispute / Summary Judgment Application
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the document provided by Tesrol constituted a payment schedule under s 14 of the Act
- 2 Whether Barclay Mowlem is estopped from asserting Tesrol did not provide a payment schedule
- 3 Whether Barclay Mowlem engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct in breach of s 52 of the TP Act
Ratio Decidendi
Summary judgment was withheld because the first and second arguable defences—whether there was a valid payment schedule and whether estoppel by representation applied—required determination on a final hearing, not summary judgment.
Court Disposition
Summary judgment application dismissed
Orders
- Notice of motion filed on 2 July 2004 dismissed
- Parties to be heard on costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment