CPB Contractors Pty Ltd v Transport for NSW [2021] NSWSC 537

CPB Contractors Pty Ltd v Transport for NSW [2021] NSWSC 537

The Expert made a valid determination in accordance with the Contract: his answer that CPB had no relevant right to compensation was to be read in context as rejecting CPB's claim to payment at the Rates, he gave sufficient reasons for rejecting Claims 2 to 4 by applying his reasoning on Claim 1, and no answer to the further compensation question was required once CPB's claim failed. The Determination did involve paying a sum of money because it concerned a money claim and rejected it. Accordingly the exception in cl 71.8.1 was not engaged, the Determination was final and binding, and the proceedings should be stayed in respect of Claims 1 to 4.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Equity Technology and Construction List; Procedural Ruling / Defendant's Notice of Motion Seeking a Stay of Proceedings in Respect of Claims Previously the Subject of Expert Determination, With an Alternative Notice of Motion Seeking Separate Determination of Issues
Outcome
Proceedings stayed in respect of claims set out in pars 7 to 37 of Plaintiff's Commercial List Statement.
Legal Topics
['expert Determination' 'contractual Preclusion of Litigation' 'stay of Proceedings' 'construction of Contract' 'gc 21 General Conditions of Contract']
['contracts' 'practice and Procedure'] ['expert Determination' 'contractual Preclusion of Litigation' 'stay of Proceedings' 'construction of Contract' 'gc 21 General Conditions of Contract']

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; Procedural Ruling / Defendant's Notice of Motion Seeking a Stay of Proceedings in Respect of Claims Previously the Subject of Expert Determination, With an Alternative Notice of Motion Seeking Separate Determination of Issues

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether CPB was precluded by cl 71 of the Contract from litigating Claims 1 to 4 after an expert determination adverse to CPB.' "Whether an alleged deficiency or error in the Expert's reasons meant there was no determination made in accordance with the Contract." 'Whether a determination that no further compensation was payable was a determination that did not involve paying a sum of money for the purposes of cl 71.8.1.' 'Whether proceedings commenced in the face of the expert determination should be stayed in part.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Expert made a valid determination in accordance with the Contract: his answer that CPB had no relevant right to compensation was to be read in context as rejecting CPB's claim to payment at the Rates, he gave sufficient reasons for rejecting Claims 2 to 4 by applying his reasoning on Claim 1, and no answer to the further compensation question was required once CPB's claim failed. The Determination did involve paying a sum of money because it concerned a money claim and rejected it. Accordingly the exception in cl 71.8.1 was not engaged, the Determination was final and binding, and the proceedings should be stayed in respect of Claims 1 to 4.

Court Disposition

Proceedings stayed in respect of claims set out in pars 7 to 37 of Plaintiff's Commercial List Statement.

Orders

  • ["Proceedings stayed in respect of claims set out in pars 7 to 37 of Plaintiff's Commercial List Statement." 'The parties should bring in short minutes to give effect to the reasons.' 'If there is any dispute as to costs, the parties should confer and agree on a timetable for short submissions; the question of costs...