Search

Building & Construction Update July 2007

Focus: Building & Construction news
Services: Property & Projects
Industry Focus: Property
Date: 04 July 2007
Author: Sydney Building & Construction Team
Dibbs Abbott Stillman Lawyers restructured on 1 March, 2009.
The Sydney, Brisbane and Canberra offices are now DibbsBarker.

What is a payment schedule?

 
Fernandes Constructions v Tahmoor Coal (trading as Centennial Coal) [2007] NSWSC 381
 

Facts

Fernandes Constructions Pty Ltd (“Fernandes”) and Tahmoor Coal Pty Ltd (trading as Centennial Coal) (“Centennial”) entered into a construction contract where Fernandes undertook to carry out construction work for Centennial.

Fernandes sent Centennial a document described as “tax invoice 05” claiming payment of $919,427.52 (inclusive of GST) and attaching a schedule identifying the relevant construction work. The invoice stated that it was “prepared under” the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) (“the Act”).

Centennial did not provide a payment schedule and Fernandes sought judgment for an amount of $782,025.72, being the amount claimed by tax invoice 05 less payment made.
 

Issue

Section 13(2) of the Act outlines the requirements for an effective payment claim, namely that:
  • it must identify the construction work (or related goods and services) to which it relates; 
  • it must indicate the amount of the progress payment that the claimant claims to be due (the "claimed amount"); and
  • it must state that it is made under the Act.
The issue to be heard was whether “tax invoice 05” complied with the above requirements, in particular the third requirement (section 13(2)(c)), and was therefore valid.
 

Decision

 
McDougall J of the Supreme Court found that the test for a valid payment claim is an objective test and the document should be considered as a whole and in context. McDougall J considered the context as not only the terms of the document but also the terms of any accompanying covering letter or facsimile. Further, the context can include the factual matrix, that is, the circumstances surrounding the document known to both parties and to a reasonable observer. 

McDougall J found that on the face of the document it was clear that Fernandes was claiming payment for construction work (as the attachment to tax invoice 05 indicated) and pursuant to a construction contract. The fact that the tax invoice stated that it was “prepared under” the Act should be interpreted as meaning that it was made under the Act as required under section 13(2)(c).

Judgment was made in favour of Fernandes for the full amount of the invoice (that is, $919,427.52), together with interest. 
 

Impact

 
In determining in determining whether a document constitutes a payment claim under the requirements of s13(2) of the Act, the court is likely to take a fair but broad approach, without being pedantic. 
 

Adjudicate or litigate

Kell & Rigby Pty Limited v Guardian International Properties Pty Ltd [2007] NSWSC 554
 

Facts

Kell & Rigby Pty Limited (“Kell”) and Guardian International Properties Pty Ltd (“Guardian”) were parties to a construction contract under which Kell performed building works for Guardian in Paddington NSW.
 
On 25 September 2006 Kell served a payment claim on Guardian. Guardian did not provide a payment schedule in accordance with the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) (“the Act”). On 24 October 2006, Kell filed an adjudication application and served a copy of the application on Guardian.
 
On 2 November 2006 Guardian filed an adjudication response stating that Kell had not given Guardian a notice of intention to apply for adjudication, as required by section 17(2)(a) of the Act. Consequently, Guardian submitted that Kell had no entitlement to lodge the adjudication application.
 
Kell formally withdrew its adjudication application and on 13 November 2006 the Adjudicator notified both parties that he did not propose to proceed with the adjudication.
Kell then applied for entry of judgment in the amount of $1,599.848.27 pursuant to section 15(2)(a)(i) of the Act.
 

Issue

Whether Kell is precluded from bringing judgment proceedings because it elected to pursue the adjudication option under section 15(2)(a)(ii) of the Act instead of the entry of judgment option under section 15(2)(a)(i) of the Act.
 

Decision

 
Justice Bergin found that Kell is not precluded from commencing judgment proceedings.
  
The adjudication application was null by reason of failure to comply with the mandatory conditions imposed by section 17(2) of the Act (particularly the notification of intention to apply for adjudication requirement). However, this did not have the legal consequence of nominating the adjudication option under section 15(2)(a)(ii) of the Act and excluding the entry of judgment option under section 15(2)(a)(i).
 

Impact

The act of filing and serving an adjudication application is incapable of creating legal consequence, including the election of an option under section 15(2) of the Act.
 

Australian industry group construction forecast

 
The Australian Industry Group (“AIG”) May 2007 Construction Outlook forecasts that growth in engineering and non-residential building activity will moderate over the next two years.
 
AIG forecasts that the total value of construction by the private sector (excluding overseas construction) will reach approximately $72 billion in 2008. This significantly outweighs historical values.
 
A key contributor to growth is the engineering construction sector with total turnover (by the private sector) predicted to rise by 12.2% in 2007 and 9.4% in 2008 to a level of $44.3 billion.
 
The growth in engineering construction is expected to continue across all key project areas, with solid rises forecast in sectors such as transport infrastructure, mining construction, and power generation. It is also expected that there will be an increase in civil projects such as the construction and upgrading of freight and port facilities to ease export bottlenecks.
Non-residential building is forecast to maintain an upward trend, generating $27.9 billion of work in 2008. However, growth is expected to be moderate. Apartment building sector work is forecast to experience a decline by 22.3% in 2007, followed by a fall of 2.9% in 2008.
 

Sources:

  • “Growth in Construction is forecast to moderate”, Australian Industry Group, 14 May 2007, http://www.aigroup.asn.au
  •  Australian Industry Group, Construction Outlook, May 2007

Major construction property lender collapses

The collapse of Australian Capital Reserve (“ACR”), being the third high risk property lender to placed under administration, sparks fears among the construction industry. On 28 May 2007 McGrathNicol were appointed administrators of 26 companies comprising the Estate Property Group (“EPS”), including it’s capital raising arm, ACR.

Previously, after application by the ASIC, the Federal Court made numerous orders in relation to a number of companies within the Westpoint Group (“Westpoint”) on grounds of insolvency.

The ACR news comes after the, Fincorp Group of Companies (“Fincorp”), described by the Sydney Morning Herald as a “crippled property investment and development group” suffered the same fate. In a media release dated 30 March 2007, KordaMentha (the appointed administrators of Fincorp) estimated that secured note holders should receive at least 30 cents in the dollar, however unsecured note holders and other unsecured creditors are unlikely to receive any return.

Approximately $1 billion of high risk property investment would have been lost over the past two years as a result of the EPS, Fincorp and Westpoint collapses if it turns out that EPS unsecured creditors don’t receive a return from the administration process. 

Sources:
  • “$330m at risk as property lender collapses” The Australian Financial Review 29 May 2007
  • Fincorp was about to raise $500m” Sydney Morning Herald 28 March 2007 
  • “Fincorp Update”, KordaMentha Media Release, 30 March 2007
 
If you would like more information, please contact a member of our Building and Construction Team listed on the right hand side of the screen.

To view a print friendly version of this update please click on the PDF link below.

Building & Construction news
Author: Sydney Building & Construction Team
Recent Publications
16 May 2012
A recent decision may provide businesses with an easy target when defending their brands from misuse by competitors under the Google Adwords Program in Australia.
15 May 2012
Commonwealth Compensation decisions for the week ending 4 May 2012.
10 May 2012
All banks should be aware of the impending laws relating to anti-competitive price signalling and information disclosures.
Privacy Disclaimer Contact Us Site Map CLIENT & STAFF LogIN © 2010 DIBBSBARKER