Martinus Rail v Qube (No 3) [2024] NSWSC 1483
An adjudicator awarded full costs where, on his reasoning, only 96.07% was allowable. The question was whether this involved jurisdictional error due to ‘legal unreasonableness’. This, noted Parker J (at [48]), was a question of statutory interpretation.
It was held the error was simply arithmetical, ‘not a contestable error of legal logic, but an uncontestable error of mathematical logic’. It could not have been intended that an award ‘based on adding 2 and 2 and getting 5 would be binding’. Because of the mistake, the adjudicator had no legal reason to award 100% costs. Parker J held (at [51]) that the error was jurisdictional and therefore open to judicial review5.
This principle is from Episode 116 of interpretation NOW!
Footnotes:
5 cf Rogers [2024] NSWSC 1344 [54], Australian Unity [2023] NSWLEC 49 [16].