Construction Law Update July 2018

55 minutes  26.07.2018 Andrew Hales
This month, we focus on the important new cladding regulations in Queensland introduced today by the Queensland Parliament that will come into effect on 1 October 2018, the Security of Critical Infrastructure Act as well as the impact on the construction and property industries of the ‘ipso facto’ reforms.

Across our analysis of cases in New South Wales, Queensland and Victoria we highlight what happens if an arbitration appointing body in a construction contract is defunct, the pitfalls when assigning an interest in equipment, how to ascertain applicable limitation periods, the professional obligations of design certifiers, the test for summary judgment under security of payment legislation, and also discuss managing the potential liability of a non-party for costs.

Your July 2018 edition is now available.

You can also access past editions.

Legislative update


  • New combustible cladding regulation to tackle privately owned buildings in Queensland  |  Building and Other Legislation (Cladding) Amendment Regulation 2018 (Qld)


  • New obligations on owners and operators of critical infrastructure assets  |  Security of Critical Infrastructure Act 2018 (Cth)
  • Ipso facto reforms have commenced – are you ready?  |  Treasury Laws Amendment (2017 Enterprise Incentives No. 2) Act 2017 (Cth)


In the Australian courts

New South Wales

  • A non-existent appointing body may not defeat an arbitration agreement  |  Broken Hill City Council v Unique Urban Built Pty Ltd [2018] NSWSC 825
  • Losing your equipment - when your assignment doesn't 'stack' up  |  Exotic Retirement Living v Construct by Design Commercial [2018] NSWSC 860
  • Owner-builder defects: which version of the Home Building Act applies?  |  Gregorio v Cheadle [2018] NSWCATAP 118
  • NCAT says you should specifically include costs in your Calderbank offer  Grace v Pepe [2018] NSW
  • Acceptance is key to quantum meruit  |  Ingate v Andrews [2018] NSWCATAP 99
  • Building claims relating to building goods or services: beware of the limitation period |  Tom v Jenkins [2018] NSWCATCD 7


  • Design certification – a timely reminder of professional obligations  |  Actron Investments Queensland Pty Ltd v DEQ Consulting Pty Ltd [2018] QCA 147
  • No right to appeal QCAT decision refusing an interlocutory application to lead fresh evidence  |  Alderton & Anor v Wide Bay Constructions Pty Ltd trading as Dixon Homes Hervey Bay [2018] QCA 149
  • Court of Appeal reaffirms position in respect of costs against non-parties  |  Arawak Holdings Pty Ltd v King Tide Company Pty Ltd [2018] QCA 148
  • Take care to ensure restrictive covenants comply with the sustainable housing provisions under the Building Act 1975 (Qld)  |  Bettson Properties Pty Ltd & Anor v Tyler [2018] QSC 153
  • Back-to-basics review of contractual principles | Hilchrist Pty Ltd v Visual Integrity Pty Ltd and ors [2018] QDC 97


  • The Civil Procedure Act test for summary judgment is not applicable to summary determinations under Security of Payment legislation  |3D Flow Solutions Pty Ltd v LTP Armstrong Creek Pty Ltd [2018] VCC 674
  • Ability of a claimant to make a payment claim post termination  | Green Suburban Pty Ltd v Vita Built Pty Ltd [2018] VSC 330
  • A strict, legalistic interpretation of Security of Payment legislation is not aligned with its purposive, payment-friendly objectives  |  SJ Higgins Pty Ltd v The Bays Healthcare Group Inc [2018] VCC 805

We're 80% vaxxed and increasing.

Playing our part in creating a safe workplace and communities.

Pro Bono and Community Investment report 2021