Mario Rashid-Ring

Areas of Expertise

With extensive experience developed in a mid-tier law firm for over 11 years, Mario has acted in a wide variety of matters, primarily focusing on building and construction disputes and commercial litigation.

Mario works closely with building professionals, developers, principals, and subcontractors in drafting, negotiating, and advising on building contracts as well as regularly assisting with contract administration, the preparation of contractual notices, payment claims, payment schedules, and with adjudications.

Mario regularly appears in State and Commonwealth Courts and Tribunals, including on a range of large scale construction disputes involving the engagement of multiple expert witnesses.

Qualifications/Memberships

Bachelor of Laws, Bachelor of Business and Commerce (Advance Business Leadership) (Western Sydney University)
Master of Laws (Applied Law), Commercial Litigation (ongoing)
Member - Society of Construction Law Australia
Law Society of New South Wales
Accredited Specialist in Commercial Litigation Law

What Mario’s clients say

“Mario is professional, efficient, reliable and personable. Most of all, Mario is a strategic thinker backed by an extensive knowledge of construction and commercial law. I highly recommend his services.” – Director, Construction Company

“The senior management team have been most impressed with the dedicated and comprehensive counsel that Mario has brought to our business. Mario has made the important effort to understand our business and the markets we are engaged with. Such in-depth knowledge has enabled Mario to provide our senior management team with the necessary legal insight and above all, sound guidance and instruction when called upon.” – Group General Manager, Construction Company

A word from Mario

Commercial disputes and litigation can be a particularly daunting area of law and of business generally. Being a party to a dispute or proceedings is not a position that any business or individual wishes to find itself in, but notwithstanding their best efforts, a dispute or litigation can be brought on by several factors outside of their control.

In my experience the early involvement and intervention by a trusted advisor can significantly mitigate or de-escalate a dispute and in doing so save the client time and resources.

Often the key to this is really understanding the client’s objectives and concerns and developing balanced and realistic solutions. I enjoy working through these issues and considering the strategy that may be most appropriate to achieve the outcomes sought. Knowing that I am that trusted advisor for my clients and can make their litigation or pre-litigation journey a little less stressful is one of the highlights of my role.

Career highlights

Winner of the 30 Under 30 – Construction and Infrastructure Award 2022 from Lawyers Weekly.
Advising, acting for and successfully obtaining a $1.6M adjudication determination against a principal pursuant to the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW), and subsequently successfully assisting that subcontractor in resisting an urgent application filed by the principal to restrain the enforcement of that adjudication determination and appeal of the adjudication determination. This payment ensured that the client had sufficient cash flow to continue its operations and wasn’t forced to settle in substantive proceedings with the principal because of cashflow constraints.
Acting for a large early works subcontractor against multiple claims for alleged defective works and a substantial claim of liquidated damages claim on the basis of a series of unsigned tender documents and succeeding in the cross-claim filed by the subcontractor.
Represented the defendants and cross-claimants in Pullen v Smedley [2017] NSWSC 1721 before Ward CJ, in Equity. The matter involved a real property dispute and the determination of whether the act of closing gates on a rural property could be considered an actionable interference and separately whether certain road works undertaken by the plaintiffs constituted a trespass. The clients were ultimately successful in their defence and cross-claim and were awarded indemnity costs.
Acting in relation to the enforcement of a $25M arbitral award obtained in Singapore and the subsequent enforcement in Australia.
Successfully represented the appellants in O'Connor v O'Connor [2018] NSWCA 214. This was a highly publicised Court of Appeal decision in which the scope for which documents may be sought pursuant to an application for preliminary discovery. This decision is the leading authority on preliminary discovery applications and to clarify that an application for preliminary discovery does not involve the determination of the merits of a proposed claim for relief, but instead will extend to the quantum of the proposed claim or claims, the potential defendants to such a claim and the defences available to those proposed defendants. This case is still the leading authority.