NSW court cases on payment claims and payment schedules

Payment schedules and deadlines

1. Forte Sydney v Lin Betty (2018) — A head contractor gave its payment schedule late, then served nothing in the 5 business days after the subcontractor’s notice under s 17(2). The court held the late schedule did not count, and the subcontractor’s $314,463.49 adjudication stood.
2. Joye Group v Cemco (2021) — A builder emailed that it would not pay until all the works were finished. The Court of Appeal held that gave no reason for not paying, so it was not a payment schedule, and gave the subcontractor judgment for the full claim.
3. Witron v Turnkey (2023) — A builder’s reply to an $804,154.63 claim gave a reason for the base work but none for $304,230 of variations. The Court of Appeal held the reply was not a payment schedule.
4. Manariti Plumbing v Universal Property (2025) — A builder served no payment schedule on a plumber’s $221,901 claim. The Court of Appeal gave the plumber judgment for the full amount.
5. A-Civil v Meso Solutions (2023) — A subcontract said the head contractor need not pay until the subcontractor sent its paperwork. The court held the Act made the payment due 20 business days after the claim anyway, and the $366,813.76 adjudication stood.

Serving a payment claim

1. Roberts Co v Sharvain Facades (2025) — A subcontractor emailed its payment claim at 7:18pm on a Friday. The Court of Appeal held it was served that Friday, not the Monday, so the builder’s payment schedule was late and it was liable for the whole $3,207,999.03 claim.
2. Rewais v BPB Earthmoving (2025) — Owners had used an email address to pay and dispute a contractor’s invoices. The Court of Appeal held a payment claim sent to that address was served when it arrived, even though nobody read it, and the $277,007.16 adjudication stood.
3. Kumar v Frankies Cranes (2025) — A crane company emailed its payment claim to a man who had only handed over his business card. The court held the claim was never served, so the $142,120 adjudication was void.
4. MGW Engineering v CMOC Mining (2021) — A contractor left its payment claims at a mine’s gatehouse at 5.15pm. The court held they were served the next day, so the mine’s payment schedules were in time and it did not owe the full $6.16 million.

Stopping work

1. Duffy Kennedy v Galileo Miranda (2020) — A contractor gave notice to suspend work on the day a late payment reached it, then kept work suspended after its right to suspend had ended. The Court of Appeal held the suspension was wrongful, and upheld the principal’s decision to take the remaining work out of the contractor’s hands.