|
|
Benchmark
A daily Bulletin listing our choice of Decisions of Superior Courts of Australia. |
 |
|
Construction
Thursday, 9 October 2014 |
|
| Executive Summary (One Minute Read) |
|
|
| Tajjour v New South Wales (HCA) - Constitutional law - NSW consorting laws do not breach constitutional guarantee of freedom of communication on government and political matters |
| Brookfield Multiplex Ltd v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 61288 (HCA) - builder contracted with property developer - builder did not owe duty of care to Owners Corporation who succeeded developer in title |
| Hallmarc Construction v Saville (VSC) - security of payments - claims made out of time - adjudication determination quashed |
| Summaries With Link (Five Minute Read) |
Tajjour v New South Wales [2014] HCA 35
High Court of Australia
French CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell, Gageler & Keane JJ
Constitutional law - s93X Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) - offence to habitually consort with convicted offenders - three persons convicted under s93X appealed - claimed s93X infringed constitutional freedom of communication on governmental and political matters - held (by Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell, Gageler & Keane JJ, French CJ dissenting): s93X was valid - held (by the whole Court): two-stage test from Lange v ABC (1997) 189 CLR 520 applied - does the law curtail political communication? - is the law reasonably adapted to serve a legitimate purpose? - held (by French CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell & Gageler J): s93X curtails political communication to some degree - slightness of degree irrelevant - held (by Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel & Bell JJ) s93X was reasonably appropriate and adapted to serve a legitimate purpose of preventing crime - s93X did not impose an undue burden on political communication - held (by French CJ and Gageler J): s93X was not reasonably appropriate and adapted to serve any legitimate purpose - held (by Gageler J): s93X should be read down so that, on its proper construction, it did not apply to consorting for the purpose of political communication - s31 Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW) - this did not assist the appellants - held (by French CJ): s93X could not be read down and was therefore invalid - held (by Keane J): s93X did not burden political communication at all - held (by Hayne, Gageler & Keane JJ): there is no independent right of association in the Australian Constitution - held (by French CJ, Hayne, Gageler & Keane JJ): the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights does not constrain the power of State legislatures to enact legislation contrary to the Covenant - appeals dismissed.
Tajjour |
Brookfield Multiplex Ltd v Owners Corporation Strata Plan 61288 [2014] HCA 36
High Court of Australia
French CJ, Hayne, Crennan, Kiefel, Bell, Gageler & Keane JJ
Negligence - builder contracted with property developer to build strata units - common property vested in Owners Corporation on registration of strata plan - latent defects in common property - Owners Corporation allegedly suffered economic loss - Owners Corporation sued builder in negligence - Owners Corporation failed before single judge of NSW Supreme Court, but succeeded in Court of Appeal - held: when strata plan registered, Owners Corporation came into existence and held common property as agent for developer and was effectively controlled by the developer - builder's responsibilities to developer were defined in detail by design and development contract - Owners Corporation and purchasers of lots were not vulnerable to builder in the required sense - builder owed no duty of care to the developer - builder owed no duty of care to the Owners Corporation - appeal allowed.
Brookfield Multiplex Ltd |
Hallmarc Construction v Saville [2014] VSC 491
Supreme Court of Victoria
Vickery J
Security of payments - principal and subcontractor entered construction contract for supply and installation of joinery - plaintiff sought declarations that two payment claims under Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) were invalid - held: both claims were out of time - claims failed to comply with mandatory requirements under ss9 and 14 and were invalid - adjudication determination founded on first payment claim was void - adjudication determination quashed.
Hallmarc Construction |
|
|
Download PDF
Follow us
Search
