1 Oct 2019
Leave to appeal was granted because there are arguable questions of law as to whether cl 27 of the contract precluded or delayed other contractual rights including cancellation and whether Jade's suspension of work amounted to repudiation justifying cancellation, warranting appellate determination.
16 Mar 2017
The court held the subject matters of the causes of action concerned apportionment of profits and losses and therefore fell within the contractually defined category of 'fundamental disputes' in clause 37, which are excluded from the clause 36 informal-resolution/arbitration process; accordingly the court retained jurisdiction, set aside the Notice of Appearance Under Protest and dismissed the defendant's application to stay or refer to arbitration.
16 May 2008
Leave to appeal was refused because the issue was interlocutory, substantive rights had not been finally determined, the contractual interpretation issue was not sufficiently clear or appropriate for appellate determination at this stage, and any error identified did not produce the requisite detriment to warrant the delay of an appeal.