BuildLaw Issue 31 March 2018 | Page 2

From the Editor
Welcome to the 31st issue of BuildLaw® in which we draw on the experience and expertise of leading experts in the field to bring you commentary, articles and reviews on topical matters relating to construction law.
In this issue we feature the approach to judicial review of adjudicator’s determinations taken by the courts in NSW and New Zealand.
We also look at on-demand v conditional bonds, pitfalls of drafting a subsequent agreement on an underlying contract, the penalty rule and the challenges of contractual drafting post Makdessi, the Supreme Court’s finding of the general reliance all owners place in council’s building control functions and its approach to deductions to any award of damages for contributory negligence, the TCC’s approach to prospective v retrospective delay analysis, and more.
In ‘Case in Brief’, Sarah Redding discusses the recent High Court decision in Body Corporate 200012 v Keene & Ors [2017] NZHC 2953 in which the Court rejected an attempt to use judicial review to strategically delay or avoid payment of an adjudication determination under the ‘pay now, argue later’ policy behind the Construction Contracts Act 2002.



I wish to take this opportunity to thank all our contributors. We are most grateful for the support we receive from dispute resolution professional, law firms, and publishers, locally and overseas, that allows us to share with you papers and articles of a world class standard, and to bring you a broad perspective on the law and evolving trends in the delivery and practice of domestic and international dispute resolution and construction law.

Contributions of articles, papers and commentary for future issues of Buildlaw® are always welcome. I do hope you find this issue interesting and useful. Please feel free to distribute BuildLaw® to your friends and colleagues – they are most welcome to contact us if they wish to receive our publications directly.










I wish to take this opportunity to thank all our contributors. We are most grateful for the support we receive from dispute resolution professionals, law firms, and publishers, locally and overseas, that allows us to share with you papers and articles of a world class s standard, and to bring you a broad perspective on the law and evolving trends in the delivery and practice of domestic and international dispute resolution and construction law.

Contributions of articles, papers and commentary for future issues of BuildLaw® are always welcome. I do hope you find this issue interesting and useful. Please feel free to distribute BuildLaw® to your friends and colleagues – they are most welcome to contact us if they wish to receive our publications directly.



-Editor and Director NZDRC