Short decision does not equal wrong decision in adjudication matters
06-Jul-2018
A recent decision of the Supreme Court* has provided a guidance as to the extent to which an adjudicator is required to give reasons for an adjudication decision pursuant to the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld) (‘the Act’).
Hyatt Ground Engineering Pty Ltd (‘Hyatt’) was engaged by Watkins Contracting Pty Ltd (‘Watkins’) to carry out works. While performing the works, an incident occurred which involved Hyatt’s drill rig slipping and rolling onto its side. As a result, Watkins purported to terminate its subcontract with Hyatt.
Following the alleged termination, Hyatt served a payment claim upon Watkins.
The matter proceeded to an adjudication. In its adjudication response, Watkins argued that it had validly terminated the subcontract, that all available references dates had been utilised by Hyatt, and that the payment claim was not supported by a valid reference date.
The adjudicator found that the subcontract had not been validly terminated and that there was a valid reference date. The adjudicator gave very brief reasons for their conclusions. The adjudicator determined that Watkins should pay the sum of $479,448.10 to Hyatt.
Before the Court, Watkins contended that the adjudicator did not properly consider Watkins’ submission that the subcontract had been terminated, with the effect that the payment claim was not supported by a valid reference date.
Hyatt’s primary position was the adjudicator had given sufficient reasons for the adjudicator’s conclusions and the Court dismissed Watkins’ Application. In summary, the Court found that the reasons given by the adjudicator for rejecting Watkins’ argument resolved the two questions which were before the adjudicator, first whether the subcontract was properly terminated, and, second, whether there was an available reference date. Consequently, the adjudicator had performed their assigned task.