New South Wales (Friday 30 October 2026)

Send us Fan Mail Twenty four decisions from four courts in the New South Wales edition of Friday 30 October 2026, eight of them headnoted. One payment claim after a construction contract ends; contributory negligence measured by each party's own skill; preference is not fraud on creditors; apprehended bias at the Judicial Commission; an undecided claim for a lesser penalty; an intensive correction order refused; leave under a vexatious proceedings order; and feral horses in a national park. Sixteen list-only decisions on the registry. The five appellate decisions also feature in the Court of Appeal brief of the same day; here they get the New South Wales angle. Commercial Law Desk (opening story). Reosteel Pty Ltd v Reem Built Pty Ltd [2026] NSWSC 1348 - (Pike J, 30 October 2026; Signal Doctrine) adjudication determination quashed, costs to the plaintiff, moneys in court released. Section 13(1C) of the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) permits only one payment claim after termination; it cannot be unilaterally withdrawn and replaced, and calling the later claim a replacement does not avoid the limit (BCFK Holdings v Rork Projects followed). No absurdity: a claimant can defer its one claim until all invoices are in. A standing offer of rates accepted by individual requests forms separate contracts, not one overarching construction contract even on the s 4 definition, so the s 8(2) licensing ground (Home Building Act 1989 (NSW)) failed. JADE Practice and Procedure Desk (also in the Court of Appeal brief). Encore Aviation Pty Ltd v O'Driscoll Aviation Pty Ltd; Encore Aviation Pty Ltd v O'Driscoll; O'Driscoll v Encore Aviation Pty Ltd [2026] NSWCA 227 - (Leeming and Stern JJA, Price AJA, 30 October 2026) Encore's appeals dismissed, the owner's cross-appeal allowed, the pilot's appeal allowed in part; recalculated judgments, interest and costs to be determined on the papers. Under s 5R of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) the standard of care is set by the special skill possessed and professed; regulatory permission for both pilot and engineer to do the daily inspection does not make them equally skilled. The maintenance contract and the pilot's knowledge of the engineer's prior inspection count; the reduction was 40%, not 50%. JADE Sanjiv v Shah [2026] NSWCA 231 - (Ward ACJ, Ball JA and Griffiths AJA, 30 October 2026) appeal against a vexatious proceedings order dismissed; leave to institute refused on the rest; costs. Written submissions seeking a wider order, with a chance to respond, satisfy procedural fairness. A party already under an order needs leave under s 14 of the Vexatious Proceedings Act 2008 (NSW), and without an affidavit substantially complying with s 14(3) dismissal is mandatory (s 15(1)(a)). Anshun estoppel: claims arising from family law consent orders should have been raised in the Federal Circuit and Family Court. JADE Commercial Law Desk . The Owners – Strata Plan No 97938 v Golden Rain Development Pty Ltd [2026] NSWSC 1362 - (Parker J, 30 October 2026) proceedings under s 37A of the Conveyancing Act 1919 (NSW) dismissed with costs; indemnity costs refused. An intent to prefer existing creditors is inconsistent with an intent to defraud, and intent to defraud is not inferred from the preference alone. Decisive: the security grants altered priority without diminishing the debtor's assets. Related-party creditors with genuine debts are treated no worse than outsiders. The owners corporation's defects claim continues. JADE Public Law Desk . Freund v Attorney Gen