Rethinking Adversarialism and Embracing Intermediate Systems Robert Fenwick Elliott This paper was given as a keynote address at the Society of Construction Law Annual Conference in Brisbane in August 2011. Other keynote speakers were John Hinchey from the USA, Professor Colin Wall from Hong Kong and Sir Lawrence Street. The paper is as follows: […]
This paper deals with three procedural matters in relation to building and construction disputes in South Australia: the recent interest in taking cases to the Federal Court instead of the State courts; a recap on the Worker’s Liens Act; and an update on the Building & Construction Industry (Security of Payment) Act 2009, and a preview of the challenges that practitioners will face when the legislation comes into operation with effect from 9 December 2011.
Implications of Misrepresentation, Trade Practices & Fair Trading Acts in Contracting and Adjudication Process & Security of Payments Legislation – Contract Management; University of Adelaide, 8th December 2010 – Robert Fenwick Elliott
An innocent party’s right to terminate a contract arises from a particular type of breach of contract by a defaulter. The factual matrix of the breach and the nature of the term breached in each case inform the innocent as to whether the right has arisen. In this paper I have used the term “the innocent” to describe the party who is seeking to terminate and the word “the defaulter” to describe the other party to the contract.
This article considers the success of the two distinct construction industry payment legislative models operating in Australia – “East Coast” and “West Coast” – in achieving their objective of improving cash flow throughout the construction industry.
Construction as a way to make a living carries more than its fair share of risk. Margins are low and uncertainties are high; any one of a number of unknowns can wipe out all of the profit on a job for the contractor or lead to huge cost increases for the owner party.
The effectiveness of various contractual approaches at delivering the intention of the contract draftsman in the event that something goes wrong with the project.
It is perhaps surprising that one of the rather rare decisions on the Western AustralianConstruction Contracts Act 2004 should have come, not from a Western Australian Court, but from the Local Court of New South Wales. But, that is what happened in Ace Constructions & Rigging Pty Ltd v ECR International Pty Ltd.
The purpose of this paper is to consider the impact of adjudication in Australia, and in particular to consider what light the Australian experience might shed on the process, and how it should be encouraged to develop.
The following paper was delivered by Robert Fenwick Elliott at IAMA’s Annual Conference held in Glenelg on 2nd June 2007.