CPB Contractors Pty Limited v Heyday5 Pty Limited [2020] NSWSC 1625

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: CPB Contractors Pty Limited v Heyday5 Pty Limited [2020] NSWSC 1625 Hearing dates: 2 November 2020 Decision date: 16 November 2020 Jurisdiction: Equity - Technology and Construction List Before: Hammerschlag J Decision: Summons dismissed Catchwords: BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION – Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) ss 22(2), (3), (5) – An adjudication determination upheld a claim for a variation of a building contract consisting of a direction by a head contractor to a sub-contractor to provide spotters for mobile elevated work platforms – Challenge to the determination on the grounds that it discloses no evident or intelligible justification for upholding the claim and that the adjudicator denied the plaintiffs procedural fairness because he found them on bases not the subject of submission duly made – HELD – Challenges not made out – Importance of recognising that adjudicators' determinations are not judgments of a court, that the procedural behaviour of adjudicators and determinations should not be examined with an overcritical or pedantic eye but should be viewed with common sense and without undue legality and should not be scrutinised with a fine-tooth comb approach. Legislation Cited: Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) Cases Cited: Cockram Construction Ltd v Fulton Hogan Construction Pty Ltd [2018] NSWCA 107 Colin Joss & Co Pty Ltd v Cube Furniture Pty Ltd [2015] NSWSC 735 Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Wu Shan Liang (1996) 185 CLR 259 Perform (NSW) Pty Ltd v Mev-Aus Pty Ltd [2009] NSWCA 157 Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Lam (2003) 214 CLR 1 Category: Principal judgment Parties: CPB Contractors Pty Limited - First Plaintiff Dragados Australia Pty Ltd - Second Plaintiff Samsung C&T Corporation - Third Plaintiff Heyday5 Pty Limited - First Defendant David Francis - Second Defendant Resolution Institute - Third Defendant Representation: Counsel: M Christie SC with D Hume - Plaintiffs FP Hicks SC with A Cameron - First Defendant