The Court held that a supporting statement under s 13(7) of the SOP Act is valid where it and the payment claim both speak from the same reference date, even if the payment claim is served some days later; the Act does not require the declaration to be current as at the date of service. The Court further held that an adjudicator commits jurisdictional error by making allowances in favour of a contractor for items (here, reversal of backcharges) that were not actually claimed in the payment claim, as determining what is claimed is an anterior question distinct from determining the merits of the dispute. Because the jurisdictional error affected part of the determination and partial severance was not available, the entire determination was quashed.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.