Okaroo Pty Limited v Vos Construction and Joinery Pty Limited & Anor [2005] NSWSC 45

Okaroo Pty Limited v Vos Construction and Joinery Pty Limited & Anor [2005] NSWSC 45

There existed an arrangement between Okaroo and Vos, prior to and alongside the formal sub-contract between Vos and Consolidated, whereby Vos undertook to carry out construction work for Okaroo and was paid directly by Okaroo. Such an arrangement is sufficient to satisfy the statutory definition of 'construction contract' under s 4 of the Act, regardless of enforceable contractual liability. Therefore, the adjudicator did not fall into jurisdictional error and the determination was not void.

Parties
Plaintiff: Okaroo Pty Limited; First Defendant: Vos Construction and Joinery Pty Limited; Second Defendant: Gerald Raftesath; Third Defendant: LEADR
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Supreme Court Proceedings (equity Division, Technology & Construction List) / Judgment on Amended Summons Seeking Declaration That Adjudicator's Determination Was Void
Outcome
Amended summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Adjudication of Progress Payments, Construction Contracts, Jurisdictional Error, Interpretation of 'arrangement', Statutory Entitlement to Payment
Building and Construction Law Administrative Law Adjudication of Progress Payments Construction Contracts Jurisdictional Error Interpretation of 'arrangement' Statutory Entitlement to Payment

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Okaroo Pty Limited

Plaintiff

Vos Construction and Joinery Pty Limited

First Defendant

Gerald Raftesath

Second Defendant

LEADR

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Supreme Court Proceedings (equity Division, Technology & Construction List) / Judgment on Amended Summons Seeking Declaration That Adjudicator's Determination Was Void

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a construction contract or arrangement as defined in s 4 of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) between Okaroo and Vos
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator's determination was void for lack of jurisdiction due to absence of such contract or arrangement

Ratio Decidendi

There existed an arrangement between Okaroo and Vos, prior to and alongside the formal sub-contract between Vos and Consolidated, whereby Vos undertook to carry out construction work for Okaroo and was paid directly by Okaroo. Such an arrangement is sufficient to satisfy the statutory definition of 'construction contract' under s 4 of the Act, regardless of enforceable contractual liability. Therefore, the adjudicator did not fall into jurisdictional error and the determination was not void.

Court Disposition

Amended summons dismissed

Orders

  • Amended summons dismissed. Vos to bring in short minutes; costs to be addressed if not agreed.