Under the Building Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) Act 2017 (Qld), compliance with s 88(3)(b) — the prohibition on considering new reasons not included in the payment schedule — is a condition of the valid exercise of the adjudicator's jurisdiction, breach of which constitutes jurisdictional error rendering the affected part of the decision void. The John Holland v RTA line of authority, which treated failures to consider or exclude submissions as errors within jurisdiction, does not apply to s 88(3)(b) given the differently structured provisions of the Payment Act. Section 101(4) impliedly confers power on the Court to alter the adjudicated amount to reflect the valid part of a partially invalid decision.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 30 later cases that cite this judgment.
8 of the 30 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.