Introduction

Since early 2006, I have been based in a law office in Adelaide, Australia, from where it is impossible not to be aware, not only of the overwhelming similarity of common systems in their treatment of construction law issues, but also of a number of differences. These notes reflect a few observations from that perspective. As time goes on, I anticipate that the number of these observations will grow.

The headings below represent some but not all of the headings in the main work; links are to notes that appear in the Legal Notes section of the Fenwick Elliott Grace legal pages.

Robert Fenwick Elliott

Chapter 1 – Construction Contracts

Implied Terms of Contract

Economy in Cost Contracts

Paragraph 1-315 (Release 14) noted that, whilst there little doubt that a contractor in a cost contract is not entitled to be paid cost incurred wastefully or extravagantly, there was little or no reported case law on the topic.

Such authority now appears from the South Australian Supreme Court Decision in OneSteel Manufacturing v United KG [2006] SASC 119: Debelle J found an implied term in a target cost contract that the reimbursable costs should be reasonably and properly incurred.

June 2006

Chapter 2 – Notices and Preliminary Considerations

Claims by Contractors for Time and Money

Suing the Employer

See the FEG note on The Law of Mitigation and Constructive Acceleration

Chapter 5 – Adjudication

The Categorisation of Third Party Decision-Making Processes

See the FEG note on Consensual Adjudication

Expert Determination

See the FEG note on Expert Determination