J Hutchinson Pty Ltd v Glavcom Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 126

J Hutchinson Pty Ltd v Glavcom Pty Ltd [2016] NSWSC 126

There was no jurisdictional error by the adjudicator; the statutory declaration was not shown to be knowingly false and was immaterial to the adjudicator's determination because clause 37.0 was void under s 34 of the Security of Payment Act. The adjudicator gave sufficient reasons and complied with natural justice. Contractual provisions imposing conditions on payment are void, and setoff may not be deducted from progress payments unless expressly provided for in the contract. Therefore, the proceedings should be dismissed.

Parties
Plaintiff: J Hutchinson Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Glavcom Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: William Timothy Sullivan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Principal Judgment / Final Judgment
Legal Topics
Adjudication Determination, Fraud, Jurisdictional Error, Liquidated Damages, Statutory Declarations, Setoff, Security of Payment Act, Extension of Time, Prevention Principle, Sufficiency of Reasons, Natural Justice
Building and Construction Equity Evidence Practice and Procedure Adjudication Determination Fraud Jurisdictional Error Liquidated Damages +7 more

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J Hutchinson Pty Ltd

Plaintiff

Glavcom Pty Ltd

First Defendant

William Timothy Sullivan

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Principal Judgment / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator committed jurisdictional error in determining entitlement to liquidated damages
  2. 2 Whether the statutory declaration attached to the payment claim was fraudulent and voided the determination
  3. 3 Whether contractual provisions imposing conditions on payment of a payment claim are void by force of the Security of Payment Act

Ratio Decidendi

There was no jurisdictional error by the adjudicator; the statutory declaration was not shown to be knowingly false and was immaterial to the adjudicator's determination because clause 37.0 was void under s 34 of the Security of Payment Act. The adjudicator gave sufficient reasons and complied with natural justice. Contractual provisions imposing conditions on payment are void, and setoff may not be deducted from progress payments unless expressly provided for in the contract. Therefore, the proceedings should be dismissed.