Will we see more liquidators using SOPA after Seymour Whyte?
The NSW Court of Appeal declined to follow the Victorian Court of Appeal on a key issue of security of payment legislation.
Earlier this year (and not for the first time in the Australian security of payment landscape) an intermediate appellate Court in one Australian State reached a different position on materially identical provisions in the security of payment scheme to that reached by the appellate Court in another State.
In Seymour Whyte Constructions Pty Ltd v Ostwald Bros Pty Ltd (in Liquidation) [2019] NSWCA 11, the NSW Court of Appeal declined to follow the Victorian Court of Appeal’s decision in Façade Treatment Engineering Pty Ltd (in liq) v Brookfield Multiplex Constructions Pty Ltd [2016] VSCA 247 on a key issue of security of payment legislation, with the NSW Court of Appeal holding that in NSW, key security of payment processes can be initiated (at least) by a claimant in liquidation.
Looking for advice on Security of Payment legislation?
Get in touch with the Construction team.
Key contacts
Related articles
Streamlining and Standards: The proposed amendments to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999
By Samantha Murphy
We examine the proposed changes and how the bills interact
Building surveyors prohibited from agreeing to novation of contract with an owner or developer
By Simone Holding, Frances Hall & Eloise Crompton
The new Code of Conduct for building surveyors approved by the Victorian Building Authority (VBA) commenced operation...
Victorian Government prohibits high-risk cladding
By Simone Holding, Frances Hall & Eloise Crompton
Minister’s Guideline 14 Revoked...
Is the law of the contract and the law of an arbitration agreement the same? Not always
By Paul Woods, Andrew Blunt & Amelia French
This decision highlights the importance of a governing law clause that covers all aspects of the contract.
Partner
Sydney