14 Aug 2017

Introduction: the prevention principle in a nutshell

An owner who prevents a contractor from performing its contract may not make any claim for the non-performance.

This is known as the “prevention principle”.

The prevention principle may be simple to recite in words but as the cases that have applied it over the past few decades show, it is not so simple in its application.

The most recent application of the prevention principle by a court of precedent was in in NSW Court of Appeal’s decision in Probuild Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd v DDI Group Pty Ltd [2017] NSWCA 151. As we shall see, the net effect of court decisions in this area highlight the need for careful contract drafting with the help of experienced construction lawyers, to avoid unintended consequences on either side of a liquidated damages claim.

How the prevention principle was applied in Probuild

In the case of Probuild:

  • a plasterboard subcontractor sought adjudication of its final payment claim;
  • the head contractor raised a contractual set-off for delayed completion of variation works directed after the subcontractor had practically completed its original scope;
  • the subcontractor argued that the head contractor had prevented practical completion by the contractual date for completion by directing additional works after the original scope had been completed (on time);
  • the head contractor argued that it was the subcontractor’s failure to notify of the delay and to claim an extension of the time for completion that had caused it to be in breach rather than the head contractor’s direction of additional works;
  • the subcontractor counter-argued that the head contractor, knowing its direction of additional works after the contractual date for practical completion must inevitably lead to delay, should have exercised its unilateral power to extend the time for completion;
  • the adjudicator agreed that the head contractor should have unilaterally extended the time for completion in these circumstances, finding its reliance on the delay caused by its own direction in these circumstances to have been unfair and unreasonable;
  • the head contractor applied to the NSW Supreme Court to review and quash the adjudicator’s decision to refuse to set off its claimed liquidated damages against the subcontractor’s payment claim;
  • the NSW Supreme Court refused the head contractor’s application;
  • the head contractor appealed against the NSW Supreme Court’s refusal to overturn the adjudicator’s rejection of the liquidated damages claim and found that both the adjudicator and the Court reviewing his decision were correct.

The duty of good faith implied in the Courts’ application of the prevention principle

Both the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal followed the reasoning in previous cases dealing with the application of the prevention principle to a contract that gives an owner, head contract or superintendent, a discretion to extend time unilaterally (that is, without a valid extension of time claim by the contractor. Those cases are:

  • Peninsula Balmain Pty Ltd v Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd [2002] NSWCA 211;
  • Spiers Earthworks Pty Ltd v Landtec Projects Corp Pty Ltd (No. 2) [2012] WASCA 53; and
  • 620 Collins Street Pty Ltd v Abigroup Contractors Pty Ltd (No 2) [2006] VSC 491.

As the Court of Appeal observed in Probuild, each of these cases recognised an implied obligation in construction contracts, to exercise the owner/head contractor’s unilateral power to extend the contractual time for completion reasonably and in good faith. This means that an owner or head contractor may lose its right to claim liquidated damages for delayed completion of works under a construction contract where:

  • the works were delayed by an act of the owner (such as directing additional works after the contractor has completed the original scope within the original time for completion;
  • the owner knows that its own act has prevented the contractor from completing its contractual scope (as varied by the owner) by the contractual date for completion;
  • the owner has the power under the contract to extend the time for completion in order to accommodate the delay caused by its own act of prevention;
  • in such circumstances, the owner, acting in good faith, should exercise this unilateral power to extend time;
  • but the owner chooses not to extend time in good faith and instead, claims liquidated damages for the delay that it caused the contractor to incur.

Lessons for contractors

A contractor who is:

  • defending a liquidated damages claim; or
  • refused payment by an owner seeking to set off its liquidated damages claim,
    may defeat the owner’s right to liquidated damages if:

    • the owner has prevented the contractor from completing its contractual scope of works on time;
    • the contract gives the owner to extend the time for completion of the contractor’s works unilaterally;
    • the owner, acting in good faith, should exercise that power; and
    • the owner does not exercise that power.

Lessons for owners, head contractors and local government

It may be tempting for owners, head contractors and local governments to delete the unilateral power to extend the contractual time for completion altogether.

This would be a mistake, however, because of a precedent case called Gaymark Investments Pty Ltd v Walter Construction Group Ltd (1999) 16 BCL 449, [1999] NTSC 143. In that case, the owner was denied liquidated damages after having deleted all standard-form provisions for extensions of time and replaced them with a complex and onerous regime that would have been very difficult for the contractor to meet. The Court interpreted this to mean that the owner had chosen to give up its opportunity to rescue its liquidated damages entitlement through unilateral extensions of time and instead, allow that entitlement to be lost because of any act of prevention. So in that case, deleting the unilateral extension of time clause actually backfired on the owner.

Gaymark has been widely criticised but no court has ever overruled it. In these circumstances, we consider the better approach to overcoming the prevention principle to be very careful drafting, by an experienced construction lawyer, that expressly excludes any duty to take the contractor’s interests into account, in good faith, when deciding, as an owner, head contractor or local government principal, whether or not to grant an extension of time unilaterally.

100 years of Supporting West Australians

"My family law experience with Mary Roubos has restored my faith in solicitors in general. She not only demonstrated her legal expertise and flair, but also showed a compassionate and understanding nature during the lengthy process. I felt that Mary went above and beyond her obligations as my solicitor, and really listened to me. I would highly recommend Mary and her assistant Debra Wilson, who also demonstrated professionalism and excellence on all levels."

Renee Frangiosa

"Always fast and thorough service. Thank you"

Sitka Pil

"I found Ben most helpful and always prompt to let me know where things were at. Will definately use Ben again and will recommend to others."

Gerrit and Mary Van Bralal

"We wish to express our thanks for your help in attending to our mother/ wife's will - Mrs Grace Margaret Vessey. Aimee was extremely helpful and easy to deal with. We are greatful for your help with our affairs."

Ms Rosalyn Norman, Mr Stephen Vessey

"Thank you ever so much for all your hard work on my case Nicole, I really appreciate everything you did for me."

Workers Compensation Client

"Thank you for such great assistance with the transaction of Flying Domestics on behalf of Lorna Good. It has been such such a pleasure to work with the HHG Legal Group and I look forward to working with you in the future."

Jim Goodwin

"Simon Creek and his team were at all times empathic, professional and confident.  My matter needed to be addressed within a pressing time frame, and their availability at short notice and contact after hours was much appreciated.  It caused me considerable stress, but having such a thoroughly reliable and competent team to call on helped me to feel in control. Although I hope not to need their services again in future, I would be confident in doing so!"

Dr Lana Bell

"A good outcome is what we can expect.  A great outcome is a sign of a company which does the very best for their clients. A very big thank you to Daniel Morris for showing empathy towards my small and much needed legal action.

To HHG Legal Group, thank you for a great outcome.  I would recommend your company to anyone seeking legal services."

Jan Atkinson

"Your support this morning was amazingly kind, not to mention your totally reassuring competence, knowledge and wisdom that you used on my behalf.  It was extremely reassuring to have your knowledgeable support, and I particularly appreciated your real and obvious kindness to me. It means so much at a very difficult time. I'm so grateful to you."

Family Law Client

"I highly recommend the services of HHG Legal Group for both personal and business needs. HHG is very up to date with legal advice and are in tune with the evolution of business."

Robert Forgione

"Sue and myself would like to thank HHG for the way in which our dispute was resolved. It is good to know that people who do not have an understanding of the legal system can rely on people like yourself and the company you represent. Without the assistance of HHG we could not have resolved the problems we were facing, not only have we resolved the issue but the outcome was more favourable then we would have thought possible. Thank-you and please pass on our thanks to all those who worked behind the scenes to achieve this outcome."

Rick and Sue Ashton

"Janene was very professional and we established a good rapport quickly. The subject of death and wills can be quite confronting to deal with, however Janene's approach was soft and accommodating."

Lynette Livesey

"A big thank you to HHG for their professional service, continued support, and wide range of legal knowledge. Our clients have given us nothing but kind words regarding HHG Legal Group and so we have no hesitation in referring and recommending Simon Creek and HHG Legal Group for their outstanding services and legal expertise."

Nigel Plowman, Director at McKinley Plowman & Associates

"Simon is a friendly and practical legal advisor. I have received great feedback from the clients I have referred to him and his team at HHG Legal Group."

Richard Beal, Director at BDO

"Over the last few years, I have been impressed by Simon’s legal ability, management skills, entrepreneurial spirit, personal integrity and people skills. He appears to be that rare breed of lawyer – both knowledgeable and commercial."

Michael Malone, Founder of iiNet

"Our family has been a client of HHG Legal Group over many years and most recently in 2013 and February 2014.  Business has included drawing up of wills for three generations and preparing of probate for my father in law.

I would have no hesitation in recommending HHG Legal Group to anyone requiring such services."

Bernice Climie

"You should be congratulated for the manner in which your staff address clients and we found our dealings with your company, once again a very pleasant experience and we would like to truly thank you for your efforts."

Steve Harvey and Jane Powell

"HHG Legal were absolutely fantastic. Extremely responsive and brought calm to our chaotic family situation through their knowledge and caring attitude. Extremely professional from our very first contact with them and they expertly guided our family though the required legal process over almost a 12 month period."

Amanda Williamson

"Fantastic team! They really care about their client. Tim Colcutt is a 'go that extra mile' guy who gives his client his all. I can't recommend HHG and Tim enough."

Kerry Samson

"Anne Hurley has been such a valuable resource of information and advice, her wealth of knowledge is truly impressive and her ability to explain things in a way that makes them easily understood is very much appreciated. Anne and the wider HHG Legal Group are always a pleasure to work with."

Giorgia Parham

"I had a fantastic lawyer in Anne Hurley. She helped me out a great deal with good, sound advice in a friendly , professional manner. First class, thanks Anne"

Graeme Hammond

"Marine Plant Systems has been working with HHG Legal Group for a few years now and they continually provide first class service. Their professional advice has been invaluable to our company."

Carolin Grimm

"We were kept up to date at all times. Pricing was always updated over the time period so we remained "in budget". Personal access to someone whenever I had questions. All in all a great experience without too much fuss."

Rosslyn Tasker - COO AltusQ Pty Ltd

"Good service you can count on."

Miles Lee

"HHG Legal Group have provided outstanding support as I have taken the journey of buying a business, their professionalism is beyound reproach. Their assistance throughout the Due Diligernce process have been invaluable, I would fully recommend them."

Mark Armitage

"I have experienced how good the HHG Legal Group team are over the last 6 years and highly recommend them."

Lyn Hawkins

"Very friendly and efficient service - what a pleasure working with Anne."

Jacques Taylor

"I highly recommend Daniel from HHG Legal Mandurah. When dealing with a complicated legal property matter recently I was extremely impressed by Daniel's honesty and integrity and the legal advice I received. I am very happy with the service from HHG Legal."

Tony Walker