Manariti Plumbing Pty Ltd v Universal Property Group Pty Ltd

[2025] NSWCA 135

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Building and Construction
2. › Security of payment legislation
3. › Payment claims
4. › Validity of payment claim
5. › Identification of construction work
6. › Whether payment claim identified work in a reasonable way
7. › Whether claim may operate by reference to contents of earlier invoices
8. › Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW), s 13(2)(a)
1. Building and Construction
2. › Security of payment legislation
3. › Payment claims
4. › Validity of payment claim
5. › Essential preconditions
6. › Whether payment claim must have objective character of being claim 'for' construction work
7. › Whether implied precondition exists that claim not be for damages or restitution
8. › Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW), ss 8, 13, 14, 15
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Summary disposal
3. › Summary judgment for plaintiff
4. › Whether only defence identified is bound to fail
5. › Requisite material and necessary assistance to enable court to reach definite and certain conclusion

Quick Take

A payment claim under the SOP Act is not invalid merely because it may be characterised as a claim for damages or restitution rather than for construction work; there is no implied precondition requiring the claim to have the objective character of being 'for' construction work, and a respondent who fails to serve a payment schedule effectively forfeits the right to resist the claim on this basis.