The one contract rule confirmed: Ventia Australia v BSA Advance Property Solutions

The Supreme Court has again been asked whether a payment claim made in respect of multiple work orders issued under a standing order contract was a valid payment claim under the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) (SoP Act).

The decision is Ventia Australia Pty Ltd v BSA Advanced Property Solutions (Fire) Pty Ltd¹ and is of interest to parties to standing order contracts and the industry more generally as confirming the 'one contract rule' under the security of payment regime.

Facts

Ventia and BSA were parties to a standing order contract² (the Subcontract) entered into in 2016 providing that BSA could be engaged to perform specific building services works,³ detailed in a work order issued by Ventia. The standing order contract providing that each issued work order formed a separate contract, governed by the terms of the standing order contract and terms (as to price, quantities, timing etc) detailed in the work order.