Current Law Journal Content
Washington & Lee Law School
  Current Law Journal Content
                  an index to legal periodicals

  Building and Construction Law Journal   (Australia)
  Volume 24, Number 4, August 2008
  homepage                   other issues

  • Leadership and loyalty
        p.221                                                                                      +cite    

  • Guidelines — expert determination submissions
        John Tyrill
        p.222                                                                                      +cite        

  • Collateral contracts and relationship contracting: Co-operation, teamwork, collaboration ... disputation?
        Trevor Thomas
        p.224                                                                                      +cite        
        This article considers those circumstances in which a collateral contract may arise in a construction project as a consequence of pre-contractual statements or terms. It does so by utilising a form of relationship contracting, known as "partnering", as an example. While partnering has been adopted with a greater degree of enthusiasm in the United Kingdom than in Australia, the approach of implementing a "partnering charter" as a side document to the main construction contract, serves as a useful illustration of the inherent dangers of collateral contracts. Consequently, the purpose of this article is to explore the issue of collateral contracts rather than draw any definitive conclusions as to the merits or otherwise of partnering.
  • Settling disputes of an intermediate kind by expert determination
        Barry Tozer
        p.238                                                                                      +cite        
        Expert determination is said to provide an effective means of resolving contract disputes. The process is not arbitration nor valuation but something of an intermediate kind. What limits do the courts place on this dispute resolution method? What are the constraints on control of the process by the expert? To what extent is this process subject to overview and intervention by the courts? This article indicates that a detailed procedure outlined by the parties in their agreement will require more cogent reasoning and explanation by the expert. A closely prescribed procedure will also be subject to more detailed scrutiny by the courts when it becomes necessary to make a decision whether to impugn an expert determination.

  • Stuart Pty Ltd v Condor Commercial Insulation Pty Ltd
        p.255                                                                                      +cite    
  • Koompahtoo Local Aboriginal Land Council v Sanpine Pty Ltd
        p.272                                                                                      +cite