Rothnere v Quasar & Ors [2004] NSWSC 1151

Rothnere v Quasar & Ors [2004] NSWSC 1151

Section 22(4) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 is not a fundamental statutory requirement the breach of which renders a determination void. Brodyn and Project Blue Sky dictate that non-compliance with s 22(4) does not vitiate a determination provided the adjudicator makes a bona fide attempt to address relevant statutory considerations.

Parties
Plaintiff: Rothnere Pty Limited; First Defendant: Quasar Constructions NSW Pty Limited; Second Defendant: Mr Robert Sundercombe; Third Defendant: Australian Solutions Centre Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Originating Summons / Judgment
Outcome
Summons dismissed
Legal Topics
Adjudication Determinations, Security of Payment, Section 22(4) of the Act, Fundamental Requirements for Validity
Building and Construction Adjudication Determinations Security of Payment Section 22(4) of the Act Fundamental Requirements for Validity

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 2 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rothnere Pty Limited

Plaintiff

Quasar Constructions NSW Pty Limited

First Defendant

Mr Robert Sundercombe

Second Defendant

Australian Solutions Centre Pty Ltd

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Summons / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s 22(4) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 is a fundamental statutory requirement such that non-compliance invalidates an adjudicator's determination
  2. 2 Whether s 22(4) is engaged on the facts of this case

Ratio Decidendi

Section 22(4) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 is not a fundamental statutory requirement the breach of which renders a determination void. Brodyn and Project Blue Sky dictate that non-compliance with s 22(4) does not vitiate a determination provided the adjudicator makes a bona fide attempt to address relevant statutory considerations.

Court Disposition

Summons dismissed

Orders

  • Summons dismissed.
  • Plaintiff to pay first defendant's costs of the proceedings; otherwise no order as to costs.