FACTS
Ramvek Pty Ltd sought summary judgment against Visioneer Builders under ss 16(2) and 17(2) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2002 (Vic) (SOP Act), following a failure to pay a payment claim.
The application was supported by an affidavit that initially omitted the required statement of belief (under Rule 22.04 of the County Court Civil Procedure Rules 2018) that the defence had no real prospect of success.
A supplementary affidavit was later filed attempting to cure the defect, but Ramvek did not reissue the summons. Visioneer challenged the procedural adequacy of the application.
ISSUE
Can a plaintiff proceed with an application for summary judgment under the SOP Act when its affidavit initially fails to comply with Rule 22.04, and can the court dispense with strict compliance in light of SOPA’s objectives?
FINDING…
…
Find Us Where Business Thrives!
Level 11, 456 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia
Level 13, 111 Elizabeth Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia
Level 10, 95 North Quay, Brisbane City, QLD 4000, Australia
