Cardinal Project Services v Hanave [2010] NSWSC 1367

Cardinal Project Services v Hanave [2010] NSWSC 1367

The second adjudication application was a nullity as it was made outside the strict time permitted by s 26(3) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW), because the entitlement to re-apply did not arise merely from the first determination being declared void. The second adjudicator's determination was void for lack of jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Determination declared void and quashed. Summons otherwise dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['adjudication Process' 'statutory Interpretation' 'natural Justice' 'jurisdiction' 'payment Claims' 'validity of Determinations']
['building and Construction Law' 'administrative Law' 'civil Procedure'] ['adjudication Process' 'statutory Interpretation' 'natural Justice' 'jurisdiction' 'payment Claims' 'validity of Determinations']

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

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a second adjudication application may be made after a prior determination is declared void' 'Whether the second adjudicator had jurisdiction under s 26 of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW)' 'Whether time limits under s 26(3) were met' 'Whether the second adjudication determination was void' 'Whether Cardinal was estopped from asserting invalidity after seeking correction under s 22(5)']

Ratio Decidendi

The second adjudication application was a nullity as it was made outside the strict time permitted by s 26(3) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW), because the entitlement to re-apply did not arise merely from the first determination being declared void. The second adjudicator's determination was void for lack of jurisdiction.

Court Disposition

Determination declared void and quashed. Summons otherwise dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['Declaration in accordance with prayer 1 of the amended summons.' 'Order in terms of prayer 4A of the amended summons.' 'Order that the amended summons otherwise be dismissed.' "Order the plaintiff to pay the first defendant's costs; otherwise no order as to costs." 'Order that the exhibits be retained for 28 days...