Cases - Gaymark Investments Pty Ltd v Walter Construction Group Ltd

Record details

Name
Gaymark Investments Pty Ltd v Walter Construction Group Ltd
Date
(1999)
Citation
NTSC 143
Legislation

Commercial Arbitration Act 1985

Keywords
Construction claim - time for completion - extension of time - delay - compliance with the contract - delay - failure to comply with contract - liquidated damages - contra proferentem
Summary

This case from the Supreme Court of the Northern Territory of Australia concerned a dispute arising out of the construction of a hotel in Darwin. The contract in question (which was based on an Australian standard form) stipulated that the contractor would only be entitled to an extension of time if it had complied strictly with the provisions of the contract imposing conditions on the form, timing and service of notices of delay. In fact, the employer had deleted a provision from the relevant Australian standard form, which entitled the contract administrator to extend time for practical completion even if the appropriate notice had not been served by the contractor.

The works fell behind schedule, eventually amounting to a delay of some 77 days caused by events for which the employer was solely responsible. At arbitration, it was held that notwithstanding the fact that the contractor had failed to comply with the notice provisions of the contract, the 77 days' delay constituted an act of prevention, with the result that there was no date for practical completion and time was put at large.

The Supreme Court agreed, relying on the contra proferentem interpretation of extension of time clauses as expressed by Salmon LJ in Peak v McKinney, and refused to allow the employer to recover what was described as 'an entirely unmeritorious award of liquidated damages for delays of its own making'.