Multiplex Constructions Pty Limited v Suscindy Management Pty Limited [2000] NSWSC 484

Multiplex Constructions Pty Limited v Suscindy Management Pty Limited [2000] NSWSC 484

On the evidence, the inference of mutual abandonment of the arbitration could not be clearly drawn. The arbitration had proceeded at a slow pace but substantial steps were taken by both parties over a prolonged period, and subsequent inactivity, without more, was insufficient to constitute abandonment. The plaintiff failed to establish a strong prima facie case, and the balance of convenience favoured allowing the arbitration to proceed; the interlocutory injunction was therefore refused.

Parties
Plaintiff: Multiplex Constructions Pty Limited; Defendant: Suscindy Management Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 June 2000
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Hearing and Determination of Application for Interlocutory Injunction
Outcome
Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed
Legal Topics
Abandonment of Arbitration, Contract of Abandonment, Interlocutory Injunction, Balance of Convenience, Delay, Loss of Records
Contract Arbitration Equity Abandonment of Arbitration Contract of Abandonment Interlocutory Injunction Balance of Convenience Delay +1 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Multiplex Constructions Pty Limited

Plaintiff

Suscindy Management Pty Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Hearing and Determination of Application for Interlocutory Injunction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitration between the parties was abandoned by mutual agreement or conduct
  2. 2 Whether an interlocutory injunction should be granted to restrain further steps in the arbitration

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence, the inference of mutual abandonment of the arbitration could not be clearly drawn. The arbitration had proceeded at a slow pace but substantial steps were taken by both parties over a prolonged period, and subsequent inactivity, without more, was insufficient to constitute abandonment. The plaintiff failed to establish a strong prima facie case, and the balance of convenience favoured allowing the arbitration to proceed; the interlocutory injunction was therefore refused.

Court Disposition

Application for interlocutory injunction dismissed

Orders

  • Interlocutory injunction restraining the ongoing arbitration is refused