Event and Time
Event Description
- The plaintiff filed a claim in March 2019 regarding services provided by the defendant architects for a construction project involving a multipurpose classroom and sports structure (COLA).
- The last formal step in the proceedings occurred in July 2020 when documents were disclosed by the plaintiff.
- A notice was sent to the defendant in June 2022 stating the plaintiff's intention to resume proceedings. This was followed by the submission of an expert report, which the defendant deemed an irregular step.
Application and Claims
- The plaintiff seeks:
- Damages for breach of contract. - Compensation for negligence. - Remedies for misleading or deceptive conduct under the Australian Consumer Law.
- The plaintiff contends that the design of the netball court did not allow it to host official games as previously instructed.
Judicial Decisions
- The court must determine:
- Whether the irregular steps taken by the plaintiff (sending letters and documents) can be declared effectual under Rule 371(2)(d) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules. - Whether leave is required under Rule 389(2) to take new steps in the proceeding after a two-year delay.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Plaintiff's Claims:
- The plaintiff asserts that it provided oral instructions for the design of the netball court to accommodate official games. - Claims the defendant’s actions constitute a breach of contract and negligence.
- Defendant's Arguments:
- The defendant denies receiving such instructions and contends that the plaintiff's letters and expert report submitted in June 2022 were irregular steps due to the two-year inactivity in proceedings. - Argues for the application of Rule 389(2), claiming that further steps cannot proceed without a court order.