Building & Construction Newsletter: September 2015
In this issue:
Following the now well reported tragic and alarming fire at the Lacrosse building in Melbourne’s Docklands, several fronts of enquiry have been launched in respect to inferior and non compliant use of cladding in buildings, particularity high rise apartments. The Victorian Building Authority for example is undertaking an investigation into the conduct of the building practitioners involved in the Lacrosse building.
This article looks at what this means at the moment to the average home owner or owner of an apartment within an Owners Corporation, who may be living in an environment where the cladding and building products which have been constructed and installed in the building may be non compliant with Australian Standards.
In early December, judgment was delivered in CMF Projects Pty Ltd v Riggall by the Queensland Court of Appeal. The case concerned the pursuit by a builder of funds outstanding on a significant cost plus contract where there was non-compliance with the Domestic Building Contracts Act. This article looks at the facts of this case and how its outcome will have significant changes for homebuilders.
The decision of Ball J in Southern Han Breakfast Point Pty Limited v Lewence Construction Pty Limited  NSWSC 502 confirms that a ‘reference date’ is an essential requirement for a valid payment claim under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW).
This article looks at how this decision reminds those in the building and construction industry that the drafting of their contracts must be done in an insightful and interconnected manner, giving mind to the relevant legislation.