INSIGHT · LICENSING & COMPLIANCE
A site diary can hold
the dates later claims count from.
A construction site diary should record, each day, the date and author, weather, labour on site by trade, plant, deliveries, instructions received with who gave them and how, delays and their cause, inspections, incidents and photo references. Several later deadlines run from facts a diary holds: Queensland's regulated contracts allow an extension of time claim only if it is made in writing within 10 business days of the builder becoming aware, or of when it reasonably ought to have become aware, of the delay's cause and extent, and the owner approves it in writing, and its WHS Act requires notifiable incident records kept for at least 5 years.
Analysed 27 October 2026 · Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (current from 3 August 2026) and Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 (current from 29 March 2026) (Qld) · Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004, Version 045 (Vic) · Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), compilation of 7 July 2026 · QBCC Act 1991 Schedule 1B (Qld) · security of payment Acts as read for our 25 October 2026 timeframes page · Lucien v Mullally; Mullally v Lucien [2021] NSWCATCD 145 · all other sources read 27 October 2026.
Key takeaways
- Some deadlines start from a fact the diary holds: Queensland's regulated contracts: an extension of time claim in writing within 10 business days of becoming aware, or of when the builder reasonably ought to have become aware, of the cause and extent of the delay (QBCC Act Sch 1B s 42). Security of payment claims run from the day work was last carried out (for example Qld BIF Act s 75(2), 6 months).
- The law sets periods for some records, not for the diary: Notifiable incident records: at least 5 years (Qld WHS Act s 38(7); Vic OHS Act s 38(4)). A safe work method statement: until the work is completed, or 2 years after a notifiable incident (Qld WHS Regulation s 303). Employee records: 7 years (Fair Work Act s 535). No instrument read sets a period for the site diary itself.
- A tribunal relied on one diary entry: In Lucien v Mullally [2021] NSWCATCD 145, NCAT found a builder's 13 January 2019 site diary entry "an accurate record of the work remaining to be done under the contract as at that date" and found the builder's extension of time claims not justified beyond what the owner's expert accepted.
- We would make the diary a set of fields: A system-design recommendation: each day's entry stores its fields with author and time, links photos and dockets by reference, and keeps any later amendment visible, so a claim six months later can be built from the record.
The daily record, field by field
The Queensland references are to regulated contracts under the QBCC Act and to the Queensland WHS Act. Other states set their own rules; our security of payment, variations and defects pages compare them.
| Field | What the entry holds | Later use | Rule or source behind it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Date, author, sign-off | Calendar date, who wrote it, when it was written | Shows the entry was made on the day | Weight given to contemporaneous documents (NCAT, [2021] NSWCATCD 145 at [46]) |
| Weather and site conditions | Rain, heat, wind; hours lost; areas unworkable | Delay and extension of time claims | Delay must be not reasonably foreseeable and beyond the builder's reasonable control, or caused by the owner or by a variation complying with Sch 1B s 40 (Qld Sch 1B s 42(1)(a)) |
| Labour on site | Each trade or company, headcount, hours | Delay analysis, progress, disputed attendance | Fair Work Act s 535 sets 7 years for prescribed employee records; the diary is not that record |
| Plant and equipment | Item, hours, idle time | Delay costs; WHS records for plant | Contract terms (project specification) |
| Deliveries | Supplier, docket number, quantity, location | Payment claims for goods supplied; ITP evidence | Payment claims can run from when goods were last supplied (Qld BIF Act s 75(2)(b)) |
| Instructions received | From whom, how (verbal, email, meeting), what, and whether confirmed in writing | Variations | Qld: no varied work before the owner agrees in writing; a copy in writing before 5 business days pass or the varied work starts, whichever is first (Sch 1B s 40(2), (5)); other states on our variations page |
| Delays | Start and end, activity affected, cause as observed | Extension of time claims | Qld: written claim within 10 business days of becoming aware, or of when the builder reasonably ought to have become aware, of cause and extent; the owner approves it in writing (s 42(1)(b) to (d)) |
| Work done and location | Activities completed by area; work remaining | When work was last carried out; progress at a date | Payment claim windows (Qld s 75(2); SA s 13(4)); the entry NCAT relied on at [153] |
| Inspections | Type, by whom, result, hold point released | ITP and statutory stage evidence | State inspection stages, as on our ITP page |
| Incidents and near misses | Time, place, people, whether notified, site preserved | WHS notification and records | Notify immediately; record kept at least 5 years (Qld WHS Act ss 38, 39) |
| Photos | Reference ID, location, time taken | Defects, covered work, delay evidence | Statutory warranty periods, as on our defects page |
Clocks a diary entry can start
A diary does not file anything. It holds the date an Act counts from.
The security of payment clocks differ by state; our timeframes page sets out all eight Acts. Qld s 75(3) has a separate rule for a final payment claim.
| Event the diary records | Clock that starts | Instrument |
|---|---|---|
| Work last carried out, or goods last supplied | Qld: a payment claim must be given before the longest of the contract period or 6 months after (s 75(2)). SA: within the later of the contract period or 6 months after (s 13(4)) | BIF Act 2017 (Qld); SOP Act 2009 (SA), as read 25 October 2026 |
| Builder becomes aware, or reasonably ought to have become aware, of the cause and extent of a delay | Qld regulated contract: extension of time claim in writing within 10 business days, and the owner's written approval; signed copy within 5 business days of the owner's approval (Sch 1B s 42(1)(c), (3)) | QBCC Act 1991, current from 1 February 2026 |
| Variation agreed | Qld: copy in writing to the owner before 5 business days pass or the varied work starts, whichever is first (Sch 1B s 40(2)) | QBCC Act 1991 |
| Notifiable incident | Qld: regulator notified immediately after becoming aware, by the fastest possible means; written notice within 48 hours if the regulator asks (s 38(1), (4)). Vic: notify immediately; written record within 48 hours (s 38(1), (3)) | WHS Act 2011 (Qld); OHS Act 2004 (Vic) |
| High risk construction work completed | Qld: the safe work method statement must be kept until the work is completed, and for at least 2 years after a notifiable incident connected with it (s 303) | WHS Regulation 2011 (Qld) |
What a tribunal did
with a site diary.
Lucien v Mullally; Mullally v Lucien [2021] NSWCATCD 145 was a home building dispute in the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal's Consumer and Commercial Division, decided on 25 November 2021. The owner gave evidence that she found the builder's site diary for 1 July 2018 to 16 January 2019, containing handwritten entries on 13 January 2019.
The Tribunal stated at [153]: "I am satisfied that the 13 January 2019 site diary is an accurate record of the work remaining to be done under the contract as at that date. It records four weeks work remaining to be done by the builder and his employees, and five weeks work remaining to be done by external trades." At [154] it found the builder's extension of time claims not justified except to the extent the owner's expert accepted, adding that the builder "adduced no evidence to demonstrate that the various reasons for delay for which an extension of time is claimed affected the critical path for the performance of the works."
On a separate event, at [66]: "There was no contemporaneous evidence which supports the builder's account of these events." At [46] the Tribunal quoted observations from an earlier Tribunal decision on assessing a witness's credit, including that a court "usually prefers to rely upon contemporaneous, or near contemporaneous, documents".
The builder's appeal was dismissed, with leave to appeal refused, by the NCAT Appeal Panel on 4 August 2022 (Lucien v Mullally [2022] NSWCATAP 257). The owner's appeal on costs was dismissed the same day (Mullally v Lucien [2022] NSWCATAP 258), and on 17 April 2023 the Supreme Court refused the owner leave to appeal from that decision (Mullally v Lucien [2023] NSWSC 373).
Retention: what the law sets,
and what is good practice
The good-practice row is a suggestion for records design, not a legal requirement and not legal advice on how long any record must be kept.
| Record | Period | Source | Set by |
|---|---|---|---|
| Record of each notifiable incident | At least 5 years from the day notice is given to the regulator | WHS Act 2011 (Qld) s 38(7) | Law (Queensland; other harmonised states not read) |
| Copy of the written incident record | At least 5 years | OHS Act 2004 (Vic) s 38(4) | Law (Victoria) |
| Safe work method statement | Until the high risk construction work is completed; at least 2 years after a notifiable incident connected with it | WHS Regulation 2011 (Qld) s 303 | Law (Queensland) |
| Employee records of the prescribed kind | 7 years | Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 535(1) | Law (national system employers) |
| The site diary itself | No period found in the instruments read | Contract or specification, if it sets one | Not set by the instruments read |
| Diary, photos and dockets for a job | At least until the last statutory warranty period for the work has run, for example 6 years for a major defect in NSW | Our defects page sets out each state's periods | Good practice (our view) |
What makes an entry
useful later.
None of the instruments read prescribes the form of a site diary. What they do prescribe is a set of dates and facts that will be asked for later, and the NCAT decision shows how a contemporaneous entry is used.
Our view, as a matter of records design. It is not a statement of what a court or tribunal will accept.
- Written on the day, by a named person: The date of the entry and the date of the events are the same, and the author can be identified.
- Facts, not conclusions: "Rain from 9.40 am to 2.15 pm; bricklayers stood down" can be checked. "Delay caused by owner" is a conclusion a claim has to prove.
- Instructions with source and form: Who gave the instruction, how, and whether it was later confirmed in writing, which the variation rules in each state turn on.
- References, not attachments lost in a phone: Each photo, docket and inspection record carries an ID the entry points to, with location and time.
- Amendments that show: A later correction is added as a dated amendment, leaving the original visible.
What we would put in a system
Where agents help here is narrow. A variation and claims agent can read a day's entries, emails and photos, draft a variation notice or extension of time claim with the dates the record holds, and flag a delay with no claim within the contract or Act period, and a person reviews and sends it. No agent decides that a delay entitles anyone to time or money, or that an incident is notifiable.
| Field | Why it is load-bearing |
|---|---|
| Entry date, author and time written | The weight of an entry depends on it being contemporaneous, as the NCAT decision shows. |
| Delay events with start, end, cause and activity | Queensland's 10 business day extension of time clock runs from awareness of cause and extent, or from when the builder reasonably ought to have become aware. |
| Instructions with giver, method and written confirmation | Variation rules in each state turn on writing and timing. |
| Work done by location, and the last day work was carried out | Security of payment claim windows count from it. |
| Incident flag with notification time and reference | Notifiable incident records must be kept at least 5 years in Queensland and Victoria. |
- Variation & claims agent: Drafts claims from the record; a person reviews and sends.
- Variations by state: What each state's home building law requires for a variation.
- Security of payment timeframes: Business days for each step, in all eight Acts.
- Inspection and test plans: Hold points, witness points and the inspection record.
Questions worth asking
of your own site records
For a Queensland builder: for each extension of time you claimed this year, does the diary show the day you became aware of the cause and extent of the delay?
Schedule 1B s 42(1)(c) of the QBCC Act counts 10 business days from that point, or from when the builder reasonably ought to have become aware, for regulated contracts. A diary entry that records the event and the day it was understood makes the count checkable. General information as read on 27 October 2026, not legal or WHS advice.
For a subcontractor: can you show the last day you carried out work on each job you have not been paid for?
Security of payment claim windows count from it, for example 6 months under Qld BIF Act s 75(2) and SA SOP Act s 13(4). A diary that records work by date and location answers it. General information as read on 27 October 2026, not legal or WHS advice.
For a principal contractor: are incidents in the diary linked to the notification and the record you must keep?
Queensland's WHS Act requires notification immediately after becoming aware and a record kept for at least 5 years (s 38); Victoria's OHS Act requires a written record within 48 hours and a copy kept for at least 5 years (s 38). General information as read on 27 October 2026, not legal or WHS advice.
For a building group: would your diaries for one site, read by someone else, show what work remained on a given date?
In Lucien v Mullally [2021] NSWCATCD 145 at [153], NCAT accepted a single dated entry as an accurate record of the work remaining. An entry written to that standard every day is what a dispute later draws on. General information as read on 27 October 2026, not legal or WHS advice.
Questions people ask
about construction site diaries
What should be included in a construction site diary?
Each day: the date and author, weather and conditions, labour on site by trade, plant, deliveries with docket numbers, instructions received with who gave them and how, delays and their cause, inspections, incidents and photo references. Each field supports a later variation, extension of time, payment claim, WHS record or defect question. General information as read on 27 October 2026, not legal or WHS advice.
Is a site diary a legal requirement in Australia?
None of the Acts and regulations we read requires a site diary as such. They require specific records, such as notifiable incident records (Qld WHS Act s 38(7)), safe work method statements (Qld WHS Regulation s 303) and employee records (Fair Work Act s 535), and a contract or specification may require a diary. General information as read on 27 October 2026, not legal or WHS advice.
How long should you keep a construction site diary?
No instrument read sets a period for the diary itself. Related records have set periods: notifiable incident records at least 5 years (Qld and Vic), employee records 7 years (Fair Work Act). As good practice (our view), keep a job's diary at least until the statutory warranty periods for the work have run, for example 6 years for a major defect in NSW. General information as read on 27 October 2026, not legal or WHS advice.
Can a site diary be used as evidence?
In Lucien v Mullally [2021] NSWCATCD 145, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal found a builder's 13 January 2019 site diary entry an accurate record of the work remaining, and found his extension of time claims not justified beyond what the owner's expert accepted; the builder's appeal was dismissed ([2022] NSWCATAP 257). General information as read on 27 October 2026, not legal or WHS advice.
What is a daily site report in construction?
A daily record of what happened on site: people, plant, materials, work done, instructions, delays, inspections and incidents. The difference from a diary is usually format, not content; what matters later is that each entry is dated, attributed and specific. General information as read on 27 October 2026, not legal or WHS advice.
What this analysis
does and does not show.
Evidence note
- What it shows
- A daily site record design in which each field is tied to a later use and to the instrument or decision behind it, the deadlines that run from facts a diary holds, and the retention periods that the instruments read set by law, as read on 27 October 2026.
- Key facts quoted
- Qld WHS Act ss 38, 39 (notify immediately; records at least 5 years); Qld WHS Regulation s 303 (SWMS kept until completion, 2 years after a notifiable incident); Vic OHS Act s 38 (48 hours; at least 5 years); Fair Work Act s 535 (7 years); QBCC Act Sch 1B ss 40, 42 (5 and 10 business days); Qld BIF Act s 75(2) and SA SOP Act s 13(4) (6 months); Lucien v Mullally [2021] NSWCATCD 145 at [46], [66], [153], [154].
- WHS rules are cited from Queensland's harmonised Act and Regulation and Victoria's OHS Act. The other states' WHS Acts were not read; NSW's register blocks automated access.
- The extension of time and variation clocks are Queensland's statutory rules for regulated contracts. Other states' home building Acts were not checked for extension of time provisions, and contract terms are not covered.
- The security of payment provisions are as read for our 25 October 2026 timeframes page and were not re-read on 27 October 2026.
- The NCAT decision was read in full on NSW Caselaw, directly. It is one tribunal decision on its facts, quoted for what the Tribunal found, not as a statement of law. The appeal decisions ([2022] NSWCATAP 257 and 258; [2023] NSWSC 373) were read on NSW Caselaw on 27 October 2026 for their orders and the Appeal Panel's passage on the extension of time findings.
- The good-practice retention row is our view. It is not a legal requirement.
- Nothing here is legal or WHS advice, and nothing here determines whether any delay, variation or incident gives rise to a right or a duty.
Bring us one month of site diaries.
Send us a month of diary entries from one job, with the variations and claims that followed. We will show you which claims the diary supports with a dated entry, which instructions were never confirmed in writing, and which delays have no recorded cause.
General information about published legislation and one tribunal decision, as read on 27 October 2026 at the versions listed. Not legal or WHS advice.
Sources
Suggested citation: Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (Qld) ss 38, 39; Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 (Qld) s 303; Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004 (Vic) s 38; Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) s 535; QBCC Act 1991 (Qld) Sch 1B ss 40 to 42; BIF Act 2017 (Qld) s 75; SOP Act 2009 (SA) s 13; Lucien v Mullally; Mullally v Lucien [2021] NSWCATCD 145; Lucien v Mullally [2022] NSWCATAP 257; Mullally v Lucien [2022] NSWCATAP 258; Mullally v Lucien [2023] NSWSC 373; as read 27 October 2026. Derived figures: none.
- Queensland Legislation - Work Health and Safety Act 2011: Current version from 3 August 2026 · read 27 October 2026 · Legislation register
- Queensland Legislation - Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011: Current version from 29 March 2026 · read 27 October 2026 · Legislation register
- Victorian Legislation - Occupational Health and Safety Act 2004: Authorised Version No. 045, as at 6 August 2025 · read 27 October 2026 · Legislation register
- Federal Register of Legislation - Fair Work Act 2009: Compilation of 7 July 2026 · read 27 October 2026 · Legislation register
- Queensland Legislation - QBCC Act 1991, Schedule 1B: Current version from 1 February 2026 · currency checked 27 October 2026; text read 9 October 2026 · Legislation register
- Queensland Legislation - Building Industry Fairness (Security of Payment) Act 2017: Current from 28 April 2026 · read 25 October 2026 · Legislation register
- South Australian Legislation - Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2009: Version 10.12.2011 · read 25 October 2026 through a rendering proxy because the site blocks automated access · Legislation register
- NSW Caselaw - Lucien v Mullally; Mullally v Lucien [2021] NSWCATCD 145: Decision of 25 November 2021, NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal · read 27 October 2026 · Primary report
- NSW Caselaw - Lucien v Mullally [2022] NSWCATAP 257: Appeal Panel decision of 4 August 2022: leave to appeal refused, appeal dismissed · read 27 October 2026 · Primary report
- NSW Caselaw - Mullally v Lucien [2022] NSWCATAP 258: Appeal Panel decision of 4 August 2022 on costs: leave to appeal refused, appeal dismissed · read 27 October 2026 · Primary report
- NSW Caselaw - Mullally v Lucien [2023] NSWSC 373: Supreme Court decision of 17 April 2023: leave to appeal refused · read 27 October 2026 · Primary report