Your selected location:
14 Apr 2014

There is commonly confusion around builders’ and contractors’ right to payment when disputes arise or contracts are terminated before completion of works.  Where does the confusion lie and what is the contractor’s right to payment for incomplete works?

Construction contracts usually provide for progress payments, either expressly, or because it is an implied term under (in Western Australia) the Construction Contracts Act 2004.

However, at law, progress payments are interim payments on account only (most of the standard contracts reflect this).  Where the contract is a lump sum or fixed price contract that sets out a scope of works and a price to be paid to the contractor for completing it, the principal does not become indebted at law to the contractor for any part of the contract price until the works are substantially completed.  Substantial completion means completion of the contractor’s entire obligation except for minor defects and omissions.  The contractor’s right to interim payments are just that – interim contractual rights and not final rights.

The implication of this is that when the contract is terminated before the works are substantially completed, the principal does not owe the contract price or any part of it to the contractor unless the contract expressly provides otherwise.  (There are different provisions dealing with this in various of the standard contracts).  In some cases, the principal may even have a case to recover progress payments already made before the contract was terminated.

So if the contract does not allow the contractor to recover part of the contract price,  where does this leave the contractor? 

The contractor can choose between two alternative bases for recovering payment where the contract is terminated before the works are completed (provided the contractor is not at fault).  They are:

(a)  if the termination was the principal’s fault in a legal sense (and this is often a complex question), the contractor can sue for the lost opportunity to earn a profit on completing the works under the contract. Most standard contracts have provisions that deal with this; or 

 

(b)  the contractor can sue for payment of an amount representing the fair value of works actually done by the contractor and freely accepted by the principal (known as “quantum meruit”). Free acceptance will usually be readily inferred when the principal requested, or contracted for, the very works that are claimed for. (The current state of the law denies the contractor recovery on a quantum meruit basis where the contractor is at fault.  Further, if the contractor was at fault, it will also likely have to face the principal’s claims for lost opportunities to profit from the use of the completed structure, or having to pay other contractors more than the original contract price to complete the works that the contractor did not do).

 

The “fair value” option may be of benefit to contractors whose contracts contain a bad bargain in that they specify a scope of works that costs more to carry out than the contract price or leave the contractor with an insufficient profit margin on completion.  However, experience shows that these are the most complex and time-consuming claims to run, which often ends up benefitting no one.  The reason is that, once the contract is set aside, it no longer sets the value of any part of the works.  This means that the parties each have to pick the works apart, often item-by-item, and find another way to evaluate them, usually with the aid of expert evidence from quantity surveyors and the like.  That may be alright when the works are relatively minor but for more complex projects this kind of painstaking analysis can come at a cost that is disproportionate to the outcome sought.

Contractors may have problems establishing a right to be paid for work done even when the contract is still on foot, for a variety of reasons, including:

(a)  departure from the contractual procedure for variation, in which case the contractor may have to establish a separate, implied promise to pay either a fixed sum or fair value, waiver of the principal’s right to insist on strict compliance with contractual procedures or the principal’s free acceptance of works with knowledge that the contractor expected to be paid for it; and 

 

(b)  disputes about whether the works constitute a variation of the contract or remediation of defective works, or are simply part of the agreed scope of works.

 

There are four main ways for a contractor or a principal to claim payment in relation to construction works which we will explore further in a separate article:

(a)         adjudication (which is quick, relatively inexpensive, final and binding but not determinative of the underlying dispute);

 

(b)         statutory demand under the Corporations Act 2001 (which again, is quick, inexpensive, but easily defeated, puts legal costs at greater risk and gives the claimant little control over the process); and

 

(c)         Court action for debt, damages or on a “fair value” basis (which will involve proceedings either before an arbitrator or judge and is slower and more expensive but final and binding. It gives parties the most control over the process, including any negotiated settlement);

 

(d)      mediation or conciliation (which can be done before or alongside any of the other options and in our experience mediation is most effective when done alongside one of the other claim processes).

 

This is general information only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. Murray Thornhill is the Director at HHG Legal Group with the Litigation/Commercial Law team. Daniel Morris is an Associate with the Litigation/Commercial Law team at HHG Legal Group. If you would like further details in relation to this information, please contact HHG Legal Group on 1800 609 945.

 

 

*This is general information only, and does not constitute specific legal advice. Please consult one of our experienced Legal Team for specific advice relevant to your situation.

Supporting Western Australian's for more than 100 years

"Always fast and thorough service. Thank you"

Sitka Pil

My circumstances at the time I made contact with HHG were dire following my argument being rejected by two no win no fee firms. Following my initial meeting with HHG's employment law team I was left feeling extremely positive by the response and concern shown by HHG in regards to their support of my argument along with their preparedness to pursue an outcome on my behalf.

I accept the fact that nobody really wins in these cases (mental health/ workplace) however the end result was what would be considered most favourable and far in excess of what would have been achieved had I not sought the advice from HHG.

I have no hesitation in recommending HHG to anyone caught up in the messy circumstances I found myself in at the time.

Great advice and five-star commitment to their client!!"

Nathan Lynch

"Thank you for such great assistance with the transaction of Flying Domestics on behalf of Lorna Good. It has been 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

"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.  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

"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 - Marine Plant Systems

"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 has provided outstanding support as I have taken the journey of buying a business, their professionalism is beyond reproach. Their assistance throughout the Due Diligence process has been invaluable, I would fully recommend them."

Mark Armitage

"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

Select your location:

Please select your nearest office location so we can show you the most relevant information.