Advice + Strategy

Mark has always adopted the approach that litigation, through to a final hearing and judgement, is often the least cost effective way of dealing with a dispute. Because of this, while on occasion there is no alternative, Mark is always mindful that there often are other ways of dealing with a dispute.

Accordingly, Mark is frequently called to advise, at the outset of a case, of a client’s prospects of success as well as the areas of risk and uncertainty that may affect the case. He is a firm believer in the value of advice, as early and as comprehensive as practical, to allow clients the greatest opportunity to make informed decisions about the issues which affect them.

In addition to the legal strengths and weaknesses of a client’s case, that advice often extends to practical means that may be adopted, in order to obtain the best result available under the circumstances; whether it be a specific application might need to be made in the court, or whether the dispute should be resolved by some alternative means, such as mediation or direct negotiation.

Recently Mark has advised in relation to matters including advising:

• the best way for a head contractor, the prior recipient of an unfavourable adjudication decision – in favour of its subcontractor, to secure its rights;
• a materials supplier on the best way to recover a significant outstanding debt owed by a building contractor;
• advising a head contractor in respect of a liquidated damages claim brought by it against a major subcontractor;
• advising a developer in relation to a claim against a firm of consulting engineers;
• advising a head contractor in relation to a potential claim for the recovery of additional payment due to the encountering of a latent condition;
• advising the subcontractors of a head contractor which had failed financially upon how to secure the payment out of moneys held by the Supreme Court of Queensland pursuant to the Subcontractors’ Charges Act 1974.