Boral Ltd v Arcfab Pty Ltd [2001] NSWSC 307

New South Wales Supreme Court

CITATION : Boral Ltd v Arcfab Pty Ltd [2001] NSWSC 307 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 1725/01; 1724/01; 1721/01 HEARING DATE(S) : 9 April 2001 JUDGMENT DATE : 9 April 2001

1725/01 Boral Limited (P) Arcfab Pty Limited (D) 1724/01 PARTIES : Boral Limited (P) Arcfab Pty Limited (D) 1721/01 Flyash Australia Pty Limited (P) Arcfab Pty Limited (D) JUDGMENT OF : Hamilton J

COUNSEL : M Dempsey (Ps) J Simpkins SC (D) SOLICITORS : Murphy & Moloney (Ps) Williams Oates Lawyers (D) CATCHWORDS : PROCEDURE [316] - Inferior Courts - District Court - Removal into Supreme Court - Extent of Court's discretion - Difficult questions of law - Considerations on which discretion exercised. LEGISLATION CITED : Corporations Law s 553C District Court Act 1973 s 145 CASES CITED : Ex parte McIntosh; re Frey (1958) 77 WN (NSW) 519 G M & A M Pierce & Co Pty Limited v RGM Australia Pty Limited [1998] 4 VR 888 DECISION : Matters removed into Supreme Court.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION

HAMILTON J

MONDAY, 9 APRIL 2001

1725/01 BORAL LIMITED v ARCFAB PTY LIMITED 1724/01 BORAL LIMITED v ARCFAB PTY LIMITED 1721/01 FLYASH AUSTRALIA PTY LIMITED v ARCFAB PTY LIMITED

JUDGMENT 1 HIS HONOUR: These are summonses relating to three matters in the District Court at Sydney, the substantive prayer in each case being that the proceedings be removed into this Court under s 145 of the District Court Act 1973 ('the DCA"). Essentially, the ground upon which the application is made is that complicated issues of law are involved. The three actions in the District Court all arise out of building contracts and the questions of law concerned essentially arise out of paragraph 9 of the defence filed in each case. "In answer to paragraphs 23, 24, 25, 26 and the whole of the Statement of Claim, the defendant says that:-