The Court held that no 'construction contract' or 'arrangement' within the meaning of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) existed between an owner and a subcontractor where the subcontractor consistently maintained it was performing work for the head contractor under the existing subcontract and refused to novate, notwithstanding the owner's representations that it would 'honour' the subcontracts. For an 'arrangement' to exist under the Act, one party must undertake to carry out construction work for another party to that same arrangement; the word 'party' in the definition refers to a party to the arrangement in both instances. The Court also expressed the obiter view that the time requirements in s 21(3) of the Act are not jurisdictional, such that a determination made slightly late would not be void on that ground alone.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 12 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 12 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.