Jennings Construction Ltd v Burgundy Royal Investments Pty Ltd

[1986] NTSC 47

Supreme Court of the Northern Territory

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Statute
2. › Workmen's liens
3. › Crown land
4. › Whether land held under Crown Lease is 'land vested in Her Majesty'
5. › Effect of changing definition of 'Crown lands' in general Crown lands legislation
6. › Workmen's Liens Act 1893 (SA), s 48
7. › Crown Lands Act (NT), s 5
1. Statute
2. › Workmen's liens
3. › Availability of lien
4. › When contract price 'becomes due'
5. › Whether s 10(2) exclusively provides how contract price becomes due under s 10(1)
6. › Need for Progress Certificate before monies 'become due'
7. › Workmen's Liens Act 1893 (SA), ss 10(1), 10(2)
1. Statute
2. › Workmen's liens
3. › Crown immunity
4. › Whether enforcement of lien against Crown Lease would 'change the liability of Her Majesty'
5. › Whether lessee procuring work 'for or on behalf of the Government'
6. › Application of proviso to third limb of s 48
7. › Workmen's Liens Act 1893 (SA), s 48
1. Crown
2. › Crown lands
3. › Whether land held under Crown Lease remains Crown land
4. › Effect of definition of 'Crown lands' in general Crown lands legislation
5. › Crown Lands Act (NT), s 5

Quick Take

In the Northern Territory, s.48 of the Workmen's Liens Act 1893 prevents the creation of any workmen's lien against a Crown Lease granted under the Crown Lands Act, because land held under Crown Lease remains 'land vested in Her Majesty' given the current definition of 'Crown lands'. This differs from the position in South Australia where the definition of 'Crown lands' excludes leased lands. Section 10(2) exclusively provides the mechanism by which monies 'become due' for the purposes of s.10(1), and where a contract requires a Progress Certificate, monies do not become due until the certificate issues.