An adjudicator's error of law in interpreting s 9(a) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) does not vitiate an adjudication determination where the adjudicator has fulfilled the statutory task under s 22 by considering all submissions. The phrase 'calculated in accordance with the terms of the contract' in s 9(a) does not engage contractual deeming provisions that determine what is due independently of calculations referable to work performed. Where an adjudicator considers submissions but finds them irrelevant due to an erroneous legal approach, this is distinguishable from wholly disregarding submissions and does not constitute a denial of procedural fairness. The appropriate remedy for a party aggrieved by a valid but unmeritorious adjudication is proceedings under s 32 of the Act.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 24 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 24 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.