Jasara Constructions (Aust) Pty Ltd v George & Irene Pty Ltd

On 28 March 2025, the defendant, then legally represented, filed a Technology and Construction List Response. The solicitor acting for the defendant ceased to act on 14 May 2025.

In the meantime, on 17 April 2025, the plaintiff moved for summary judgment. Although such applications are discouraged in this list, in the particular circumstances of this case I have concluded that it was an appropriate course for the plaintiff to take.

The plaintiff's notice of motion was first returnable before me on 16 May 2025. Mr Samir Eskander appeared on that occasion seeking to represent the defendant. As I understand it, he was not then a director of the defendant, but he now has become a director of the defendant. Mr Eskander appears with his son before me today, and I am prepared to give Mr Eskander leave to appear for the company for today's purposes only.

In its Technology and Construction List Statement, the plaintiff alleges that it served a payment claim on the defendant pursuant to s 13 of the Act claiming an amount of $1,465,359.05. The defendant has admitted that allegation in its List Response.

The plaintiff alleges that the defendant did not, pursuant to s 14 of the Act, serve a payment schedule in response to that payment claim, nor pay the amount referred to in the payment claim. That allegation is also admitted by the defendant in the list response.

It follows from those matters that, by reason of ss 15(1), 15(2)(a), and 15(4) of the Act, the plaintiff is entitled to judgment.

The plaintiff also claims interest to judgment at the rate to which the parties agreed in the underlying building contract. I propose to enter judgment in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum claimed and to order that the defendant pay interest up to judgment in an amount that can be calculated. I will order that the defendant pay the plaintiff's costs.

I will invite Mr Bolger to provide to my Associate this afternoon short minutes giving effect to these reasons.

As Mr Eskander is here unrepresented and obviously at a disadvantage, I propose to give the defendant liberty to apply to set aside these orders provided that such liberty is to be exercised by 5pm on 13 June 2025 and to be supported by all evidence and other material upon which the defendant will wish to rely in support of that application.