NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Intercon Engineering Pty Ltd v Lend Lease Project Management & Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd; Christopher John Wright v Lend Lease Project Management & Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd [2014] NSWSC 441 Hearing dates: 8 April 2014 Decision date: 16 April 2014 Jurisdiction: Equity Division Before: Ball J Decision: Both proceedings be dismissed. Catchwords: CONTRACT - construction - whether subcontract incorporated terms of head contract - uncertainty Cases Cited: Austra Tanks Pty Ltd v Running [1982] 2 NSWLR 840 Electricity Generation Corporation t/as Verve Energy v Woodside Energy Ltd [2014] HCA 7 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Intercon Engineering Pty Ltd ACN 084 882 815 (Plaintiff 2013/347434) Christopher John Wright and Cathy Maree Wright (Plaintiff 2013/347418) Lend Lease Project Management & Construction (Australia) Pty Ltd (ABN 97 000 098 162) (Defendants) Representation: Counsel: H F Woods (Plaintiffs) S Robertson with R E Raffell (Defendants) Solicitors: Michael Flaherty (Plaintiffs) Dibbs Barker (Defendants) File Number(s): 2013/347434 and 2013/347418 Publication restriction: None
Judgment
Introduction 1In July 2007, the defendant in each of the 2 proceedings with which this judgment is concerned, now known as Lend Lease Building Pty Ltd (Lend Lease), entered into a head contract (the Head Contract) with the Commonwealth of Australia, represented by the Department of Defence, for the design, construction, commissioning and qualification of a facility referred to as the "Mulwala Redevelopment Project" (the Project). 2In April 2009, the plaintiffs in matter 2013/347418 (Mr and Mrs Wright) entered into 3 subcontracts with Lend Lease to perform certain work in connection with the Project. In August 2009, the plaintiff in matter 2013/347434 (Intercon) entered into a subcontract with Lend Lease also to perform certain work in connection with the Project. 3The issue in both proceedings is whether Lend Lease is obliged to release the balance of the retention amounts it continues to hold under each subcontract.
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate