Parker J held that an adjudicator's failure to consider submissions duly made by a respondent in an adjudication response, contrary to s 22(2) SOPA, can constitute jurisdictional error where the failure is material in the LPTD sense (a realistic possibility the outcome could have been different). The Court found jurisdictional error established in relation to a $9.5 million resequencing variation claim (CN-420) where the adjudicator failed to engage with Qube's substantive response submissions and evidence. On the question left open in Fulton Hogan, Parker J held that a complete absence of reasons for a determination may give rise to jurisdictional error under s 22(3)(b), rejecting the submission based on City of Ryde that breach of the reasons obligation could never be jurisdictional. The Court also considered but did not finally resolve the scope of 'legal unreasonableness' as a ground of review under SOPA, accepting it is available in principle but noting it would require an extraordinary case.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 8 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 8 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.