Musings of a busy mind

One of the changes brought in by the Arbitration Amendment Act 2016 was the substitution of “the appointed body” for the High Court in Article 11 of Schedule 1 of the Act. The appointed body was to be a suitably qualified body appointed by the Minister of Justice. On 2 March 2017, Hon Mark Mitchell, the Associate Minister of Justice, appointed AMINZ as that body.

On 3 February 2017, the Court of Appeal released its decision in the case of CJ Parker Construction Ltd (in liq) v Ketan [2017] NZCA 3. Observing that the consequences for not complying with the scheme under section 23 of the Construction Contracts Act 2002 may be draconian, Justice Toogood observed that “a pragmatic, common sense and contextual approach” was required when considering the validity of a payment claim in terms of section 20. More critically, the Court of Appeal has perhaps thrown a lifeline to owners who are unable to provide a valid payment schedule for an amount less than claimed, if the payment claim itself provid

In traditional forms of construction contract, the Engineer/Architect holds a special position of independent professional. An increasing number of contracts are moving away from this approach, either by doing away with the role altogether, or by recognising the role of Project Manager. This paper was delivered to an AMINZ breakfast meeting in March 2010; it has grown slightly since.