Case Reports
All contributions regarding the following information are gratefully accepted and should be directed to Angela Vaccari (Editor)
Posted: 21 September 2009
In Blue Chip Development Corporation (Cairns) Pty Ltd v van Dieman [2009] FCA 117 (13 February 2009), the Federal Court of Australia determined whether the balance of convenience favours interlocutory relief under the Building and Construction Industry Payments Act 2004 (Qld). Held: the balance of convenience did not favour grant of interlocutory relief as no sufficient foundation for interference with legislative scheme established by Act shown.
Other Recent Entries
- Role of architect proprietors when administering a building contract
- Damages for defective work - relevance of plaintiff's future intention
- Court of Appeal considers meaning of “building work” and “building action”…
- High Court rules on whether loss of chance should be extended to medical negligenc…
- Consequential loss - What's in and what's out?
- What amounts to a deed and when is “a deal a deal”?
- View all Case Reports Updates