including any case law that would support the Applicant’s signing of its claim. I require the above submissions by 10.00am CST on Monday 7 December 2015. Depending on the content of the above submissions, I may require further submissions from the parties in relation to any additional questions that may arise and, if this becomes necessary, I will seek an extension of time from the Registrar under s.34(3)(a) in which to make my determination. As the parties would know, it essential that I fully inform myself in relation to this matter to ensure that there is no denial of natural justice and that I have taken account of all the evidence in this matter in line with Barr J’s decision in Hall Contracting Pty Ltd v McMahon Contractors Pty Ltd and Anor [2014] NTSC 20 at 42” On 3 December 2015 I sent a letter to the Construction Registrar, copied to the parties, seeking an extension of time within which to make my determination. The grounds sought were the complicated issues in the adjudication that required further submissions from the parties which would take some additional time to finalise. The Construction Registrar granted my request that same day 3 December 20915 and the time for making my determination was extended up to and inclusive of 18 December 2015. Later that same day, 3 December 2015, the Respondent sent me its further submissions to the questions I had asked on 2 December 2015. I confirmed receipt of those submissions and requested the Respondent copy the Applicant on the submissions, which they did. On 7 December 2015 the Applicant sent me its further submissions to the questions I had asked on 2 December 2015. The submissions were a little late as follows: “Dear Adjudicator, There has been some delay in our office this morning. My apologies. Applicant’s further submissions attached. Regards, Jeff Collins Associate” Later that day, 7 December 2015, the Respondent objected to the lateness of the Applicant’s further submissions and requested that I not
[redacted] Structural Site Inspections block work $442.75 $442.75 Rectification block work inspection 20-Oct-15 [redacted] Structural Inspections for section 40 block work $569.25 $0.00 Main Project Supply [redacted] 6m skip bin and council tip fees $577.94 $577.94 Rectification of block work TOTAL $32,120.55 $17,066.88 Respondent Counterclaim Table 1. I find that the defect rectification counterclaim made by the Respondent was incorrectly calculated and is $32,120.55 (including GST) as per the above Table 1 Scott Schedule. I award the Counterclaim sum of $17,066.88 (including GST) to the Respondent for the rectification of defective block work which sum is to be deducted from the Applicant’s Tax Invoice 2103. The Additional Rent Expenses of $6,360.00 (including GST) The Respondent has claimed additional rent expenses of $6,360.00 (including GST) for the delay caused by the Applicant’s defective block work. This claim simply cannot be sustained on the evidence of this contract and is ambit at best. There is no project schedule, no critical path to impact and no date of practical completion agreed between the parties to the contract. As it is, there are only limited written terms with virtually all the implied provisions of the Act implied as the contractual provisions owing to the absence of a written contract. I determine that this claim fails due to the lack of any supporting evidence provided by the Respondent under the contract.