Australia: Does your contract involve construction work under the Construction Contracts Act 2004 (WA)? Guidance from the WA Supreme Court

The delivery last week of the decision of the Western Australian Supreme Court in Field Development Solutions Pty Ltd v SC Projects Australia Pty Ltd [2015] WASC 60 is interesting for at least three reasons. First, it confirms that a respondent may, in resisting an application for review of a dismissal of an adjudication application (under section 46 of the Construction Contracts Act 2004 (WA) (Act)), raise 'fresh' grounds of dismissal. Secondly, it provides guidance on what constitutes 'construction work' for the purposes of the Act. Thirdly, it touches (briefly) on the question of the scope of the exclusion from 'construction work' in section 4(3) of the Act.

BACKGROUND

Field Development Solutions Pty Ltd (FDS) entered into an agreement with Clough Sea Trucks Joint Venture (CSJV) for the supply, maintenance, servicing and operation of a number of specialised all-terrain vehicles (Service Agreement).

These vehicles were to be used to transport a quantity of quarried material from a location outside the project site to certain set locations on the project site. That material would be used to backfill trenches and gullies that had been previously excavated during the installation of a pipeline by which gas from the Gorgon LNG Plant would be supplied into the Dampier to Bunbury gas pipeline.

FDS applied under the Act for adjudication of a payment dispute. CSJV defended the application on the sole basis that the application had been made out of time and ought to be dismissed for that reason under section 31(2)(a)(ii) of the Act. The adjudicator accepted that argument.

FDS made an application to the Western Australian State Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) for review of the adjudicator's decision. Before the Tribunal, CSJV raised an additional basis upon which FDS's application ought to be dismissed. CSJV contended, in addition, that the Service Agreement was not a 'construction contract' within the meaning of section 3 of the Act (as set out in section 31(2)(a)(i) of the Act).

There were three issues for the Tribunal (constituted by Member Carey) to consider:

  1. Where an application is dismissed on one of the four grounds of dismissal under section 31(2)(a), is the review by the Tribunal to be confined to that ground only or is it possible to consider other available ('fresh') grounds?
  2. If it is possible to consider other available grounds for dismissal, was the Service Agreement a 'construction contract' within the meaning of section 3 of the Act?
  3. Was FDS's adjudication application prepared and served on time in accordance with section 26 of the Act?

THE TRIBUNAL'S DECISION

The availability of 'fresh' grounds of dismissal

The Tribunal held that, where an application is dismissed on one ground, the Tribunal's review of the adjudicator's decision to dismiss will not be confined to that ground. The Tribunal considered that the relevant 'decision' being reviewed by the Tribunal was the adjudicator's decision to dismiss the application under section 31(2)(a) of the Act and not the basis or ground that the adjudicator had relied upon in arriving at that decision.

Indeed the Tribunal considered that if it was to form the view that an additional ground of dismissal applied, it would be compelled to dismiss the application notwithstanding that the additional ground had not been raised before it.

Was the Service Agreement a 'construction contract'?

The Tribunal found that the "main objective" of the Service Agreement was the haulage of fill from a stockpile located outside of the project site to certain locations within that site. For the following reasons, the Tribunal held that this was not a construction contract.

  1. First, in dismissing the submissions that FDS's obligations under the Service Agreement (to supply all-terrain vehicles for the purpose of hauling fill material) fell within the scope of paragraph (c) of the definition of 'construction work', the Tribunal held that the Service Agreement did not involve "the construction, in whole or in part, of civil works" for the purposes of section 4(2)(c) (read with section 4(1)(a)).
  2. Secondly, the Tribunal was not persuaded that the extending provision in paragraph (e) of section 4(1) was triggered so as to encompass the Service Agreement. This was because, in the Tribunal's view, that extending provision was only triggered where the relevant works comprised the "constructing ... of ... civil works" within section 4(2)(c) of the Act and, in this case, the supply of all-terrain vehicles for the purpose of hauling fill material was not concerned with "constructing ... any civil works".
  3. Finally, while the Tribunal was of the view that the five non-exhaustive examples of works listed in paragraph (f) of section 4(2)2 pointed towards a broad definition of 'construction works', in the Tribunal's view 'construction works' would encompass:
    • site works, but not the mere supply of equipment and material;
    • earthmoving within a particular site, but not the hauling of fill material from a location outside of the relevant site to that site; and
    • site restoration, but not the haulage of fill material to facilitate site restoration.

Was FDS's adjudication application prepared and served within time?

Having made several findings as to the procedure for payment set out in the Service Agreement, the Tribunal held that no 'payment dispute' for the purposes of the Act had yet arisen, with the consequence that FDS's application was made prematurely (not late).

Outcome before the Tribunal

Thus, the Tribunal ultimately dismissed FDS's review application on two, independent, bases.

  1. First, the contract in question was not a 'construction contract' within the meaning of section 3 of the Act.
  2. Secondly, FDS's application was not prepared and served in accordance with section 26 of the Act.

THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION

FDS applied to the Western Australian Supreme Court for leave to appeal against the Tribunal's decision.

FDS relied on six grounds of appeal, which essentially raised two questions for the Court:

  1. First, was the Tribunal able to consider, as part of its de novo review, the 'fresh' ground of dismissal raised by CSJV before it (namely, whether the Service Agreement was a 'construction contract'3)?
  2. Secondly, had the Tribunal made an error of law in concluding that the Service Agreement was not a 'construction contract'?

Justice Mitchell concluded that FDS was successful on one of its six grounds of appeal. His Honour held that the Tribunal had erred in law in concluding that the Service Agreement was not a 'construction contract'. However, because the Tribunal had dismissed FDS's review application on two, independent, bases, Justice Mitchell found that the Tribunal's error did not affect the Tribunal's ultimate conclusion.

Did the Tribunal have the capacity to consider 'fresh' grounds of dismissal?

Justice Mitchell held that the Tribunal was able to consider the 'fresh' ground of dismissal raised by CSJV because the Tribunal had to, before it could exercise its review jurisdiction under section 46 of the Act, satisfy itself that none of the four conditions set out in section 31(2)(a) of the Act applied.

Having considered the relationship between section 46 of the Act and the relevant provisions of the SAT Act, Justice Mitchell observed that the scheme of the Act was to compel an adjudicator to dismiss an adjudication application and to preclude the adjudicator from determining that application on its merits if any of the four circumstances in subparagraphs (i) to (iv) of section 31(2)(a) existed. Section 31(2)(a) of the Act conferred a power, and duty, upon the adjudicator to dismiss an adjudication application without making a determination of its merits. The duty to exercise that power was triggered if any of the four circumstances in subparagraphs (i) to (iv) of section 31(2)(a) existed.

Justice Mitchell held that it was inconsistent with the scheme of the Act to construe section 46 as only allowing the Tribunal to consider whether one of the potentially available grounds for dismissing an adjudication application is established. His Honour took the view that section 46(1) of the Act provided a "right of review of an adjudicator's ... decision made under section 31(2)(a)" and not from a decision made under any one of the four circumstances set out in subparagraphs (i) to (iv) of section 31(2)(a).

Was the Service Agreement a construction contract?

Justice Mitchell held that the Tribunal had erred in law in concluding that the Service Agreement was not a 'construction contract' and that this error arose from the Tribunal's treatment of the term 'construction contract' under section 3 of the Act. His Honour found that the Service Agreement was a 'construction contract' on three different bases; namely, that it obliged FDS to:

  • carry out 'construction work' within the meaning of paragraph (a) of the definition of 'construction contract';
  • supply 'plant' within the meaning of paragraph (b) of the definition of 'construction contract' when read with section 5(1)(c) of the Act; and
  • provide 'on-site services' within the meaning of paragraph (d) of the definition of 'construction contract'.

The Service Agreement obliged FDS to carry out 'construction work'

In contrast to the Tribunal's view, Justice Mitchell concluded that the Service Agreement was a 'construction contract' for the purposes of the Act because, in substance, it obliged FDS to carry out 'construction work' within the meaning of paragraph (a) of the definition of 'construction contract'. His Honour found that the construction of a gas pipeline (including the rehabilitation of the land on which the pipeline was constructed) fell within paragraph (c) of the definition of 'civil works'5. Importantly, his Honour (adopting the language of section 4(2)(f) of the Act) went on to find that moving earth to the location of the pipeline was "an integral part" of those 'civil works'. That is because, without that activity, the construction of the pipeline and site restoration could not be completed. The activity of hauling backfill material could be regarded:

  • as 'site restoration' within the meaning of section 4(2)(f)(v); and also as
  • 'earthmoving' within the meaning of section 4(2)(f)(i).

The Service Agreement obliged FDS to supply 'goods'

Justice Mitchell found that FDS's obligation to supply the all-terrain vehicles also brought the Service Agreement within paragraph (b) of the definition of 'construction contract'. FDS's supply of all-terrain vehicles constituted a supply of 'goods' that were related to construction work as contemplated by section 5(1)(c) of the Act, namely, the supply of 'plant' "for use in connection with the carrying out of the construction work at the site of the construction work".

The Service Agreement obliged FDS to provide 'on-site services'

Justice Mitchell's finding that the haulage of fill material was 'construction work' also allowed His Honour to further find that FDS's obligation to maintain and operate the all-terrain vehicles also brought the Service Agreement within paragraph (d) of the definition of 'construction contract'. FDS's obligation to maintain and operate the vehicles constituted 'on-site services' that were directly related to construction work as contemplated by section 5(3)(b)(i) of the Act.

Operation of section 4(3)(c) of the Act

Justice Mitchell briefly considered whether the 'mining exclusion' in section 4(3)(c) of the Act operated to exclude the Service Agreement from constituting a 'construction contract'. His Honour took the view that the construction of a pipeline for the transport of processed gas would not fall within the work that is excluded by section 4(3)(c) of the Act, namely, work for the constructing of 'any plant' which extracts or processes a "mineral bearing or other substance".

His Honour commented that, even if the transport of natural gas in the pipeline, in fact, involved regulation of the physical properties of the transported gas (for example, temperature, pressure and moisture content), such regulation would not involve 'processing' for the purposes of section 4(3)(c) of the Act. Rather, that regulation would be a necessary part of the transport of the gas.

Having regard to the decision of Re Anstee-Brook; Ex parte Karara Mining Ltd [2012] WASC 129, his Honour also took the view that CSJV had not established that the pipeline performed a function that was so related to "extracting or processing" of natural gas that the works the subject of the Service Agreement could be said to fall within the ambit of section 4(3) of the Act.

This aspect of Justice Mitchell's decision is interesting because the very same question (namely, whether the construction of a pipeline for the transport of processed gas would fall within the scope of works that were excluded by section 4(3)(c) of the Act) came before Justice Le Miere in the context of an application for two injunctions in connection with this same pipeline. That application sought to restrain an adjudication applicant (Kempe Engineering Services (Australia) Pty Ltd) from progressing an adjudication application and to restrain the adjudicator from making a determination6.

The adjudication respondent (Enerflex Process Pty Ltd) had sought the injunctions on the basis that it had an arguable case that its contract with Kempe was not a 'construction contract' because the work on this pipeline was excluded from being construction work by virtue of section 4(3)(c) of the Act. Justice Le Miere had found that there was a serious question to be tried albeit without any detailed analysis because the injunction application was to be dismissed on other grounds. Justice Mitchell's opinions in the present decision, suggest that Enerflex's contract with Kempe would not be excluded by section 4(3)(c) of the Act.

THE ORDERS MADE BY THE SUPREME COURT

Justice Mitchell ordered that the Tribunal's decision to dismiss FDS's adjudication application under section 31(2)(a) be affirmed. His Honour also considered it appropriate to make a declaration that the Tribunal had erred in law in finding that the Service Agreement was not a construction contract for the purposes of the Act. Central to this result was His Honour's concern that the Tribunal's decision that the Service Agreement was not a construction contract would operate as a barrier to the success of any further adjudication applications made by FDS in connection with the Service Agreement.

CONSEQUENCES OF THE DECISION

The Court's decision confirms that, upon the Tribunal's review of an adjudicator's decision to dismiss an adjudication application under section 31(2)(a) of the Act – being a hearing de novo – the Tribunal is not restricted to considering only those grounds of dismissal relied upon by the adjudicator. The Tribunal must satisfy itself that none of the four conditions set out in section 31(2)(a) of the Act apply.

Further, the Court's decision establishes that the class of activities that fall within the term 'construction work' under section 4(2) of the Act is a broad class. That the Tribunal and the Court came to different views suggests that whether an agreement is to be characterised as obliging a party to carry out 'construction work' for the purposes of the Act is not always an easy question and will continue to be a fertile ground for dispute.

The Court's dicta in relation to the question of the scope of the exclusion from 'construction work' for the purposes of section 4(3)(c) of the Act suggests that 'construction work' that relates to a section of pipeline that is used for the transportation of natural gas will not be caught by that exclusion.

Footnotes

1Section 4(2)(c) of the Act provides that 'construction work' means work on a site in WA "constructing the whole or a part of any civil works, or a building or structure, that forms or will form, whether permanent or not and whether in WA or not, part of land or the sea bed whether above or below it". FDS had (strangely) submitted that the particular type of 'civil works' that applied was "a road" (within section 4(1)(a) of the Act) or any works associated with civil road works (within section 4(1)(e) of the Act).

2Such works being "associated" with the five categories of 'construction work' set out in paragraphs (a) – (e) of section 4(2).

3Section 31(2)(a)(i) of the Act.

4Primarily, sections 27 and 29 of the SAT Act.

5Paragraph (c) of section 4(1) provides that 'civil works' includes a pipeline for water, gas, oil, sewage or other material.

6 See Enerflex Process Pty Ltd v Kempe Engineering Services (Australia) Pty Ltd [2013] WASC 406.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Most awarded firm and Australian deal of the year
Australasian Legal Business Awards
Employer of Choice for Women
Equal Opportunity for Women
in the Workplace (EOWA)

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
Some comments from our readers…
“The articles are extremely timely and highly applicable”
“I often find critical information not available elsewhere”
“As in-house counsel, Mondaq’s service is of great value”

Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions