98 In par 19 of its amended defence and counterclaim, in which the defendant alleges that it was entitled to terminate the sub-contract, pursuant to cl 8.1(a) of the written agreement, the defendant appears to allege that the defendant was in default of its obligations under the sub-contract because it had given notice, in its facsimile dated 11 July 2003, of its intention to suspend the plastering works, in circumstances in which it was not entitled to suspend the works: see par 19(b) and par 19(d) of the amended defence and counterclaim. However, in her closing submissions, counsel for the defendant did not appear to rely upon the plaintiff's purported suspension of the plastering works as constituting the default, but appeared to suggest instead that the plaintiff's default was its failure to comply with cl 4.2 of the written agreement, which required the plaintiff to perform the plastering works in accordance with the sub-contract to the satisfaction of the defendant and, as part of that obligation, to comply with directions from the defendant given under the sub-contract. Although counsel for the defendant did not provide, in her written submissions, any instances of the plaintiff failing to comply with a direction of the defendant under the sub-contract, she referred, in her oral submissions, to Longo's "site instruction", sent by facsimile on 11 July 2003 (Exhibit 32), and a further facsimile which he sent on 12 July 2003 (Exhibit 33). I have already mentioned those facsimiles. In the first, Longo complained about the absence of solid plasterers on site that day and complained also that the setting plasterers who were on site had left at 11 am to collect their pay. In the second, Longo referred to the promise made by DeVincentis that he and two other plasterers would work on Saturday, 12 July 2003 and Sunday, 13 July 2003, and complained that, despite that promise, no plastering work had been done on 12 July 2003. Longo then went on to point out that the plaintiff had lost the opportunity to complete two days work during fine weather. He also reminded the plaintiff that "you need to complete the works" and said that "time is the essence of this contract".