Case Study Archive

Below you can see our full case archive.

There are a total of 1503 cases in our archive

previous 1 2...143 144145146 147 148 149 150 151 next

11th March 2001
Consolidated Constructions Pty Ltd v Ettamogah Pub [2004] NSWSC 110

Building and Construction - Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 1999 - whether s 7(2)(a) applicable - meaning of "forms part of" in s 7(2)(a) - legislative purpose of s 7 - whether plaintiff may serve a progress claim under s 13 - whether "progress payment" has same meaning in Act as it does under the construction contract - effect of amendments to (inter alia) s 13 by Act No. 133 of 2002

Click here to read more
7th March 2001
Joseph Finney Plc v Gordon & Gary Vickers [2001] HT 00/454

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes An exchange of mutual promises is good consideration. The promise not to adjudicate is a promise of value, and could bind the parties HHJ David Wilcox 7 March 2001 F and V executed a building contract incorporating the terms of the standard form JCT 1980 edition as amended private with quantities. The works were the provision of further accommodation at V's hotel in Chester. A dispute arose between the parties relating to F's application for payment number 13 and the subsequent valuation and Architect's certificate. On 8 November 2000 the Architect certified that £347k was due. On 21 November V gave notice that they were withholding £347k on account of 14 weeks delay. F wrote to V on 22 November disputing the deduction and said that...

Click here to read more
28th February 2001
Staveley Industries Plc v Odebrecht Oil & Gas HT01/052

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Structures which are, or are to be, founded on the sea bed below low water mark are not structures forming, or to form, part of the land for the purposes of s105(1) of the Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 HHJ Richard Havery QC, Technology & Construction Court 28 February 2001 The defendant O, sub-contracted certain works to the claimant, S for the supply and installation of fittings into steel modules which were being constructed in England. The modules were intended for use as living quarters for operatives of an oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico. They were to be towed to the location and welded onto platforms which were to be supported by legs founded in the sea bed. A dispute arose between the parties and S applied under...

Click here to read more
13th February 2001
Glencot v Ben Barrett Ltd [2001] EWHC Technology 15

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Summary judgment would not be given automatically where an adjudicator had also acted in a mediation role between the parties, as there could be an arguable case of perceived bias of the adjudicator. HHJ Humphrey Lloyd QC, Technology & Construction Court. 2 and 13 February 2001 B appointed G under a sub-contract. Disagreement arose over sums due. G referred the dispute to an adjudicator and a meeting was scheduled for 29 September. Shortly before the meeting the parties agreed a settlement and informed the adjudicator. However, there were still disputes over discounts and the adjudicator agreed to assist on the basis that he would resume his role as if negotiations broke down. After some 6 hours a settlement figure was agreed but other points...

Click here to read more
13th February 2001
Rainford House (in Receivership) v Cadogan [2001] HT 01/014

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes A party who admits that the claimant is entitled to judgment on an adjudicator's decision may be able to obtain a stay of execution if it can show credible evidence of the claimant's insolvency. HHJ Richard Seymour QC, Technology & Construction Court 13 February 2001 C employed R under a JCT contract, with Contractor's Design. The case concerned R's application to enforce the adjudicator's award to it of £77,350 by summary judgment. C disputed that R was entitled to judgment on one ground: that R was in administrative receivership, and therefore that it was inappropriate to enter summary judgment, relying upon the Court of Appeal's judgment in Bouygues v Dahl-Jensen. C said the appointment of the receiver indicated that R was, or probably...

Click here to read more
2nd February 2001
LPL Electrical Services Ltd v Kershaw Mechanical Services [2001] HT 00/427

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Where an adjudicator makes an error of law or interpretation this does not mean that he has acted in excess of his jurisdiction HHJ Richard Havery QC, Technology and Construction Court 2 February 2001 In this case K was seeking to defend L's summary judgment application under Part 24 of the CPR. K argued that the adjudicator, who had made a decision under HGCRA, did not have jurisdiction to decide how much was due for anything other than one specific application for payment. In this instance L claimed £70k in accordance with interim application number 8. If this sum was not due then they required a ruling on the amount that was in fact due. The wording of the contract payment mechanism was unusual. On analysis it seemed to say that the payment...

Click here to read more
19th January 2001
Brenton A.J. v Palmer [2001] TCC 19.01.2001

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The adjudicator had made a decision which he was empowered under the Act to make, and if he had made any error in it, which in fact results in his having no jurisdiction, it was an error of fact which it was certainly within his jurisdiction to make. His Honour Judge R. Havery, QC, Technology and Construction Court 19 January 2001 M was engaged to supply and fit electrical equipment to the premises of either P or his company, L. The adjudicator, Dr Robert Gaitskill QC, ordered P to pay M £26,000 plus fees. During the adjudication, he was asked to consider whether he had jurisdiction to make an award, because the true party to the relevant contract was L, not P. The adjudicator decided as a question of fact that the contracting party was P. At...

Click here to read more
18th January 2001
David Wilson Homes Ltd v Survey Services Ltd & Anor [2001] EWCA Civ 34

Click here to read more
12th January 2001
Holt Insulation Ltd v Colt International Ltd [2001] LV01 5929 TCC

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Although references to an adjudicator may relate to the same matters arising out of contractual relations between parties they do not necessarily relate to the same dispute. The notice of referral must be closely examined to see if the dispute is the same. Judge Mackay, Liverpool District Registry Technology and Construction Court. Date unknown H sub-contracted work to C. C applied for interim payments during the course of the work. The amount due in respect of application number 10 was disputed. C argued that they were owed £110k. The matter was referred to an adjudicator and C requested that the adjudicator order "immediate payment of the balance of the sum due." The adjudicator decided that due to the terms of C's notice of referral his...

Click here to read more
21st December 2000
Karl Construction Ltd v Sweeney Civil Eng. Ltd [2000] ScotCS 330

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The adjudicator is not fettered, when applying the relevant law, by the parties' representations: it is open to the adjudicator to reach a conclusion different from that agreed by the parties. A failure by the adjudicator to seek further representations from the parties before reaching a conclusion different from their agreed position is not necessarily a breach of the rules of natural justice. Extra Division, Inner House, Court of Session Lord Marnoch, Lord Dawson, Lord Clarke 22 January 2002 The petitioners (K) brought a reclaiming motion against the dismissal by the Lord Ordinary of a petition for judicial review of an adjudicator's decision under the HGCR Act 1996. The facts of the case and decision by the Lord Ordinary are set out on page...

Click here to read more

previous 1 2...143 144145146 147 148 149 150 151 next