Taylor Projects Group Pty Limited v Brick Dept Pty Limited & Ors [2005] NSWSC 439

Taylor Projects Group Pty Limited v Brick Dept Pty Limited & Ors [2005] NSWSC 439

Service of a payment claim under s13(1) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) occurs when the claim is received at the respondent's ordinary place of business, irrespective of business hours; therefore, Taylor was required to provide a payment schedule by 19 January 2005 and failed to do so. Consequently, Taylor was precluded from participating further in the adjudication. There was no constructive resubmission of a payment schedule as required by s17(2)(b). The adjudication determination was valid and not void.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Application to Set Aside Adjudication Determination / Judgment at First Instance
Outcome
Adjudication Determination valid.
Legal Topics
['building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (nsw)' 'adjudication Determinations' 'payment Claims' 'payment Schedules' 'service of Documents']

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

Application to Set Aside Adjudication Determination / Judgment at First Instance

  1. 1 ['Whether the adjudicator erred in law in finding a payment claim was served on 5 January 2005 under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW)' "Whether a letter from Taylor's solicitors constituted constructive resubmission of a payment schedule under s17(2)(b) of the Act" 'Whether the requirements for a valid adjudication determination under the Act were satisfied']

Ratio Decidendi

Service of a payment claim under s13(1) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) occurs when the claim is received at the respondent's ordinary place of business, irrespective of business hours; therefore, Taylor was required to provide a payment schedule by 19 January 2005 and failed to do so. Consequently, Taylor was precluded from participating further in the adjudication. There was no constructive resubmission of a payment schedule as required by s17(2)(b). The adjudication determination was valid and not void.

Court Disposition

Adjudication Determination valid.

Orders

  • []