The recent decision in Kronstruct Pty Ltd v UAG Toorak Pty Ltd [2026] VSC 213 highlights the continuing importance of carefully drafted security provisions in construction contracts, while also arriving at a time of significant legislative reform to Victoria’s security of payment regime. In Kronstruct, M Osborne J granted an interlocutory injunction restraining the principal

Calling Upon Contractual Security: The New Notice Requirement and the Option to Pay Cash to Avoid Reputational Risk Unconditional bank guarantees, payable on demand, are a common form of security provided by contractors under administered construction contracts. A dispute over whether the principal is entitled to call on the guarantee will not usually prevent the

This case involved an appeal by homeowners (Owner) from a judgment of the County Court of Victoria concerning a major domestic building contract (Contract) with the respondent builder (Ozzie). In a joint judgment, the Court, constituted by McLeish, Lyons JJA and Nichols AJA revisited, affirmed and explained Cardona v Brown,[1] including the identification of repudiation and its

Duty to mitigate loss – No positive obligation on an owner to allow a builder an opportunity to rectify defective works: Ceerose Pty Ltd v The Owners – Strata Plan No 89074 [2025] NSWCA 235   “The Eliza” apartment building, in the centre of Sydney, was completed in 2014. In light of a range of defects which

In Hungerfords v Walker the High Court held that at common law a plaintiff can recover damages in the nature of interest on a compound basis for loss of use of moneys by reason of a breach of contract or negligence. Recovery in such cases is on the basis that the plaintiff has in fact suffered a

Can a Superintendent certify liquidated damages after the principal takes works out of the contractor’s hands or following termination? In Cobolt Constructions Pty Ltd v Duke Ventures Wellington Street Pty Ltd [2025] VSC 609, the plaintiff contractor (“Cobolt”) sought an interlocutory injunction to restrain recourse by the defendant principal (“Duke”) to bank guarantees provided by way of