28 Apr Construction Law Review
Construction Law Review – April
Please refer below to our Construction Law Review, selected from AR Conolly’s Daily Bulletins covering Insurance, Banking, Construction & Government.
Lim v Comcare [2017] FCAFC 64
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Kenny, Tracey & Bromberg JJ
Administrative law – worker’s compensation – appellant worked for Australian Communications and Media Authority – appellant claimed compensation pursuant to Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) – Administrative Appeals Tribunal found applicant suffered psychological condition arising from employment as result of performance appraisal which was ‘reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner’ and thus appellant’s condition excluded from definition of ‘injury’ under Act – primary judge dismissed appeal, finding Tribunal did not fail to properly apply s5A in making its findings of fact – whether primary judge erroneously failed to find Tribunal misconstrued ‘suffered as a result of’ in exclusion in definition of injury in s5A(1) – effect of decision in Comcare v Martin [2016] HCA 43 – held: Tribunal erred with regard to Comcare v Martin by failing to address entirety of question to which exclusion in s5A(1) gave rise when read with s5B – Tribunal erred in ‘the application of the causal connection’ in the exclusion – appeal allowed.
Lim
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia
Kenny, Tracey & Bromberg JJ
Administrative law – worker’s compensation – appellant worked for Australian Communications and Media Authority – appellant claimed compensation pursuant to Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) – Administrative Appeals Tribunal found applicant suffered psychological condition arising from employment as result of performance appraisal which was ‘reasonable administrative action taken in a reasonable manner’ and thus appellant’s condition excluded from definition of ‘injury’ under Act – primary judge dismissed appeal, finding Tribunal did not fail to properly apply s5A in making its findings of fact – whether primary judge erroneously failed to find Tribunal misconstrued ‘suffered as a result of’ in exclusion in definition of injury in s5A(1) – effect of decision in Comcare v Martin [2016] HCA 43 – held: Tribunal erred with regard to Comcare v Martin by failing to address entirety of question to which exclusion in s5A(1) gave rise when read with s5B – Tribunal erred in ‘the application of the causal connection’ in the exclusion – appeal allowed.
Lim
AAP Industries Pty Ltd v Rehau Pte Ltd [2017] NSWSC 390
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Davies J
Contract – parties executed contract for supply by plaintiff of plumbing articles to defendant (supply contract) – also said to be seven informal contracts and documents between parties for other plumbing articles (‘further contracts’) – plaintiff contended defendant breached contracts when it ceased ordering plumbing articles from plaintiff – principal issue was whether contracts had implied term of exclusivity – construction of contracts – held: defendant obliged by express terms of supply contract to purchase the plumbing articles only from plaintiff – Court found it ‘may not be necessary to imply a term of exclusivity’ but found term implied to extent authorities suggested it was implied by contract’s proper construction – plaintiff entitled to damages for breach of supply agreement.
AAP
Supreme Court of New South Wales
Davies J
Contract – parties executed contract for supply by plaintiff of plumbing articles to defendant (supply contract) – also said to be seven informal contracts and documents between parties for other plumbing articles (‘further contracts’) – plaintiff contended defendant breached contracts when it ceased ordering plumbing articles from plaintiff – principal issue was whether contracts had implied term of exclusivity – construction of contracts – held: defendant obliged by express terms of supply contract to purchase the plumbing articles only from plaintiff – Court found it ‘may not be necessary to imply a term of exclusivity’ but found term implied to extent authorities suggested it was implied by contract’s proper construction – plaintiff entitled to damages for breach of supply agreement.
AAP
United Petroleum Pty Ltd v Bonnie View Petroleum Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) & Ors [2017] VSC 185
Supreme Court of Victoria
Kennedy J
Contract – proceedings arising from sale of petrol station business by defendant company (BV) to plaintiff – BV leased sale property from defendant landlords – plaintiff contended BV breached Side Agreement by failing to remediate land and to take steps to assign lease – plaintiff claimed sum to remediate site and amount incurred in obtaining lease directly with landlords – amounts claimed against BV and defendant guarantor – construction of Side Agreement – held: plaintiff established alleged breaches of Side Agreement – plaintiff entitled to apply Retention Amount and proceeds of Bank Guarantee against its losses under Side Agreement – judgment for plaintiff – counterclaim dismissed.
United Petroleum
Supreme Court of Victoria
Kennedy J
Contract – proceedings arising from sale of petrol station business by defendant company (BV) to plaintiff – BV leased sale property from defendant landlords – plaintiff contended BV breached Side Agreement by failing to remediate land and to take steps to assign lease – plaintiff claimed sum to remediate site and amount incurred in obtaining lease directly with landlords – amounts claimed against BV and defendant guarantor – construction of Side Agreement – held: plaintiff established alleged breaches of Side Agreement – plaintiff entitled to apply Retention Amount and proceeds of Bank Guarantee against its losses under Side Agreement – judgment for plaintiff – counterclaim dismissed.
United Petroleum
Masters Home Improvement Australia Pty Ltd v North East Solutions Pty Ltd [2017] VSCA 88
Court of Appeal of Victoria
Santamaria, Ferguson & Kaye JJA
Contract – respondent (NES) was corporate entity in ‘Maxi Foods Group’ (Maxi) – first applicant (Masters) was subsidiary of second applicant (Woolworths) – respondent agreed to purchase site to construct store to be leased to Masters – Masters’ obligations to be guaranteed by Woolworths – parties entered Agreement for Lease of site – NES sued Woolworths and Masters for breach of agreement – primary judge found Woolworths and Masters breached obligation to act reasonably and in good faith to attempt to resolve differences concerning cost of store’s construction and Masters’ contribution to costs – appellant appealed – held: Court made critical finding concerning costs of store’s construction and amount Masters was to contribute to the costs on basis of a spreadsheet provided by quantity surveyor – spreadsheet was work in progress and its figures not final – no sufficient basis for judge’s pivotal finding – no breach of contract by Masters or Woolworths – appeal allowed.
Masters Home Improvement
Court of Appeal of Victoria
Santamaria, Ferguson & Kaye JJA
Contract – respondent (NES) was corporate entity in ‘Maxi Foods Group’ (Maxi) – first applicant (Masters) was subsidiary of second applicant (Woolworths) – respondent agreed to purchase site to construct store to be leased to Masters – Masters’ obligations to be guaranteed by Woolworths – parties entered Agreement for Lease of site – NES sued Woolworths and Masters for breach of agreement – primary judge found Woolworths and Masters breached obligation to act reasonably and in good faith to attempt to resolve differences concerning cost of store’s construction and Masters’ contribution to costs – appellant appealed – held: Court made critical finding concerning costs of store’s construction and amount Masters was to contribute to the costs on basis of a spreadsheet provided by quantity surveyor – spreadsheet was work in progress and its figures not final – no sufficient basis for judge’s pivotal finding – no breach of contract by Masters or Woolworths – appeal allowed.
Masters Home Improvement
Holiday Trading and After-Hours Information
CRM Brokers wishes you and your family a very Merry Christmas and we look forwar...
04 November, 2024The Importance of Police Reference Numbers for Claims
At CRM Brokers, we are committed to making our client’s claims experience ...
30 October, 2024Are You Underinsured? An insight into how a claim could be affected
What is underinsurance? Underinsurance is a preventable but often devastating co...
27 August, 2024Celebrating Excellence at the 2024 Strata Community CHU Awards
Celebrating Excellence at the 2024 Strata Community CHU Awards The Strata Commun...
06 August, 2024