The Court held that clause 28.2 of a modified AS4916-2002 construction management contract, which required the construction manager to submit a progress claim within 28 days of a termination for convenience notice in accordance with clause 25, did not make compliance with those administrative and timing requirements a condition precedent to the construction manager's entitlement to recover the clause 28.2 termination payments as a contractual debt in final rights proceedings. The progress claim mechanism was characterised as a cash-flow device for prompt interim payment, not as conditioning the substantive right to payment. The Court reframed the separate question and declined to determine the validity of the progress claim itself, as disputed factual issues remained and further evidence was required.
The full text is available to signed-in members.