Further Rollout of Project Trust Accounts on Hold -&- Contracting Out of Delay Damages
# Court Decisions
February 6, 2025

Further Rollout of Project Trust Accounts on Hold & Contracting Out of Delay Damages

Part A - QLD

Further Rollout of Project Trust Accounts on Hold

A recent BIF Act Proclamation places the further rollout of Project Trust Accounts (PTA’s) (for eligible contracts valued below $10 million) on hold until further notice.

Previously, the roll out of PTAs was to be:

(a)    For all eligible contracts valued at $3 million or more, to commence on 1 March 2025; and

(b)    For all eligible contracts valued at $1 million or more, to commence on 1 October 2025.

However, as a result of barriers identified to the government by lobbying interests within the industry (including the increased costs for small business and limitations of available software) the liberal party has delayed the further roll out of PTA’s to allow additional time for industry education, ongoing government support and a reduction in red tape for small business.

The further Roll Out has been placed on a permanent hold until the oucome of further industry consultation.

Part B - National

Contracting Out of Delay Damages

The ACT Supreme Court in Jeffcott v Davesi Construction Group Pty Ltd considered, amongst other things, whether striking out an LD’s clause removed the owner’s right to general damages for delay to completion.

The Court adopted the established principle that “an intention to exclude a right to common law damages must be expressed in clear and unambiguous terms” and held that striking out LD's, without more, does not exclude a party’s right to general damages for delay to completion. Rather is merely consistent with an intention not to claim an entitlement to LD’s.

The Court found no express or clear and unambiguous words in the contract to demonstrate an intention to exclude general damages for delayed completion. Additionally, there had been no evidence of any agreement that damages for delayed completion would not be pursued. Accordingly, the owner was awarded general damages.

Recommendation

This decision serves as a useful reminder to obtain legal advice before finalising contract terms to ensure the agreement reached is properly documented, particularly where it concerns matters such as a contractors rights to liquidated damages and general damages for delay.

Further Rollout of Project Trust Accounts on Hold -&- Contracting Out of Delay Damages
# Court Decisions
February 6, 2025

Further Rollout of Project Trust Accounts on Hold & Contracting Out of Delay Damages

Further Rollout of Project Trust Accounts on Hold & Contracting Out of Delay Damages

Part A - QLD

Further Rollout of Project Trust Accounts on Hold

A recent BIF Act Proclamation places the further rollout of Project Trust Accounts (PTA’s) (for eligible contracts valued below $10 million) on hold until further notice.

Previously, the roll out of PTAs was to be:

(a)    For all eligible contracts valued at $3 million or more, to commence on 1 March 2025; and

(b)    For all eligible contracts valued at $1 million or more, to commence on 1 October 2025.

However, as a result of barriers identified to the government by lobbying interests within the industry (including the increased costs for small business and limitations of available software) the liberal party has delayed the further roll out of PTA’s to allow additional time for industry education, ongoing government support and a reduction in red tape for small business.

The further Roll Out has been placed on a permanent hold until the oucome of further industry consultation.

Part B - National

Contracting Out of Delay Damages

The ACT Supreme Court in Jeffcott v Davesi Construction Group Pty Ltd considered, amongst other things, whether striking out an LD’s clause removed the owner’s right to general damages for delay to completion.

The Court adopted the established principle that “an intention to exclude a right to common law damages must be expressed in clear and unambiguous terms” and held that striking out LD's, without more, does not exclude a party’s right to general damages for delay to completion. Rather is merely consistent with an intention not to claim an entitlement to LD’s.

The Court found no express or clear and unambiguous words in the contract to demonstrate an intention to exclude general damages for delayed completion. Additionally, there had been no evidence of any agreement that damages for delayed completion would not be pursued. Accordingly, the owner was awarded general damages.

Recommendation

This decision serves as a useful reminder to obtain legal advice before finalising contract terms to ensure the agreement reached is properly documented, particularly where it concerns matters such as a contractors rights to liquidated damages and general damages for delay.

More Articles

Call Icon