*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU.
To purchase an article, please email: LTA.Service@thomsonreuters.com or contact us on 1300 304 195 (Australian customers) or +61 2 8587 7980 (international customers) during business hours (Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AST).
The latest issue of the Building and Construction Law Journal (Volume 34 Part 2) contains the following material:
- The Hudson Prize 2017 – Editor: Michael Christie SC
Advocate, Judge and Arbitrator: Perspectives on Commercial Law – The Honourable Murray Gleeson AC
New South Wales Bar Association: Commercial Law Section, Inaugural Bathurst Lecture: 3 May 2018.
In assessing damages for breach of a construction contract, primacy is given to the plaintiff’s performance interest. Accordingly, damages reflecting the cost of rectification will be awarded unless the court considers that the proposed rectification work is neither “necessary” nor “reasonable”. The primary qualification of reasonableness is inherently impressionistic and open-textured. This article analyses the role played by the doctrine of substantial performance, and its underlying rationale, in the principles governing rectification damages. It is argued that, in many cases, the reasonableness of rectification damages can be assessed by asking whether the contractor has substantially performed its obligations. It is argued that by adopting this approach, the reasonableness qualification will be applied in a more structured and predictable manner.
- Probuild Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd v Shade Systems Pty Ltd
- Maxcon Constructions Pty Ltd v Vadasz
- All Seasons Air Pty Ltd v Regal Consulting Services Pty Ltd
For the PDF version of the table of contents, click here: BCL Vol 34 No 2 Contents.
For general queries, please contact: email@example.com.