Case Study Archive

Below you can see our full case archive.

There are a total of 1503 cases in our archive
  • 15th December 2005
    Melville Dundas Ltd v George Wimpey UK Ltd [2005] ScotCS CSIH_88
  • 9th December 2005
    Full Metal Jacket Ltd v Gowlain Building Group Ltd [2005] EWCA Civ 1809
  • 6th December 2005
    10 Gilmer Limited v Tracer Interiors & Construction Limited HC WN CIV-2005-485-2009 [2005] NZHC 331
  • 5th December 2005
    Brown (L) & Sons v Crosby North West Homes 2005] EWHC 3503 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit This is a case looking at the scope of the adjudicator’s jurisdiction under the JCT Contract 1998 form.   There was a discrepancy between clause 5 (which gave the parties the right to refer disputes to adjudication) and clause 39A.1 (which dealt with the adjudication procedure itself): the former referred to disputes arising “under” the contract, whereas the latter had been amended so that it read “under, out of or in connection with” the contract.  Notwithstanding the absence of the words “out of or in connection with” in clause 5, the court found that the parties had intended to extend the adjudicator’s jurisdiction to cover disputes arising out of or in connection with the contract. ...
  • 30th November 2005
    Everest and Borner v Robin Schwass Construction Limited and Ors HC WN CIV-2005-485-849 [2005] NZHC 308
  • 25th November 2005
    Tera Construction Ltd v Yung Ton Lam [2005] EWHC B1 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit This case illustrates the fact that the courts are usually reluctant to (a) refuse enforcement of adjudication decisions for lack of jurisdiction on the part of the adjudicator or (b) exercise their discretion to order a stay of execution on the grounds that the employer has a claim in respect of defective works and/or that the contractor is in financial difficulties.Christopher Clarke J – Queen’s Bench Division, Technology and Construction CourtBackground Mr Lam employed Tera to demolish a house and construct two new houses under a JCT Minor Works Agreement.  Various issues arose between the parties, including the extension of time that was due to Tera, the valuation of the works, the sum due on the penultimate certificate toward payment,...
  • 25th November 2005
    Pioneer Sugar Mills Pty Ltd v United Group Infrastructure Pty Ltd [2005] QSC 354
  • 25th November 2005
    Energetech Australia v Sides Engineering [2005] NSWSC 1143
    CONTRACTS – BUILDING, ENGINEERING AND RELATED CONTRACTS – remuneration – payment claim under Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 – application for declarations and injunction to prevent payment claim from being submitted to adjudication on basis that payment claim was not made with respect to a reference date under the contract, or was made with respect to a reference date concerning which another payment claim had already been adjudicated – whether appropriate in principle for court to involve itself in such a question – STATUTES – ACTS OF PARLIAMENT – operation and effect of statutes – Act creating an obligation and providing means for securing compliance with that obligation – whether court intervention in the operation of that means of compliance permissible – TRADE PRACTICES AND RELATED MATTERS...
  • 25th November 2005
    Prynew P/L v Piling Contractors (Qld) P/L [2005] NSWSC 1211
    BUILDING AND ENGINEERING CONTRACTS: - adjudication determination under Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) - security for payment - continuation of legal proceedings INTERPRETATION: - general rules of construction of instruments ACTS CITED:Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 (NSW) s 3, s 23 and s 32 - Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW) s 30
  • 24th November 2005
    Midland Expressway Ltd (MEL) v Carillion Construction Ltd (CAMBBA) (No2) [2005] EWHC 2963 (TCC
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit This is a particularly important case for those involved in PFIs and PPPs. It concerned the construction of the new M6 toll road, near Birmingham. The contractual arrangements for the PFI involved a special-purpose vehicle (SPV) company entering into a concession agreement with the Secretary of State for Transport, under which the SPV agreed to design, build and operate the M6 toll road. The SPV’s design and construct operations were subcontracted to a contractor, which was a consortium of large construction companies. The subcontract contained “equivalent project relief” provisions which, in effect, limited the subcontractor’s entitlement to payment for such matters as variations, and compensable delay, to the amount which...