Case Study Archive

Below you can see our full case archive.

There are a total of 1503 cases in our archive
  • 18th February 2000
    Atlas Ceiling v Crowngate [2000] CILL 1639
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The Court may conduct a trial on the issue of jurisdiction in place of a summary judgment application if it wishes to do so. The parties will not be held to have entered into a contract, even if one is signed, where important terms are not agreed and subsequent actions are inconsistent with the existence of an agreed contract. If a contract is entered into after 1 May 1998, even if it has retrospective effect, a right to adjudicate is implied. HHJ Thornton QC, Technology & Construction Court 18 February 2000 The question in this case was whether the contract had come into existence prior to 1 May 1998. The adjudicator believed that the Act did apply, and A tried to enforce the award. The Judge took an interesting approach to the question of...
  • 16th February 2000
    Workplace Technologies v E Squared Ltd & Mr J L Riches [2000] CILL 1607
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The court commented that an injunction may not be available to prevent a party continuing with a void adjudication as there was no legal or equitable right to protect; also the balance of convenience may not favour the grant of an injunction. HHJ Wilcox QC, Technology & Construction Court 16 February 2000 E was engaged by W as a sub-contractor for work at the Bluewater shopping centre. The dispute centred on the value of an interim payment. E had submitted an interim application, and W had not served a notice specifying the sum due. E argued that the result of this was the amount of the application was the sum due. E served a notice of adjudication, but W argued that the contract did not contain the right to adjudicate because the contract came...
  • 1st February 2000
    Absolute Rentals v Gencor [2000] HT99-169
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The Defendant's application for a stay to arbitration in defence of proceedings to enforce the adjudicator's award was refused on the grounds that there was no defence to the claim. An application to stay the judgment due to questions over of the Claimant's financial means was also refused HHJ Wilcox QC, Technology & Construction Court 28 February 2000 The parties entered into a building contract pursuant to the JCT Agreement for Minor Works 1980 edition. This contained no adjudication clause, so the Scheme applied. The contract did contain an arbitration clause. A applied to enforce the adjudicator's peremptory decision ordering payment of around £17,500 to it. G believed that it was entitled to apply for a stay to arbitration under section...
  • 28th January 2000
    Samuel Thomas Construction v J & B Developments
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes If works combine work relating to a dwelling with other works, the works may not "principally" relate to a dwelling, and be caught by the Act. A residential occupier does not have to be in occupation at the time of the contract, nor does the building have to be a dwelling at that time. HHJ Overend, Exeter District Registry 28 January 2000 J&B, a partnership formed by a husband and wife, purchased four barns in Devon. It intended to convert two of them, one for itself, and the other for sale. It engaged S to carry out building works. Disputes arose as S said that he had not been fully paid, and J&B claimed S was in delay. S terminated the contract, and asked for an adjudicator to be appointed. J&B said that the contract was one with...
  • 24th January 2000
    Northern Developments (Cumbria) Ltd v J & J Nichol [2000] EWHC Technology 176
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes A matter that is not mentioned in a notice of intention to withhold payment is not something that the adjudicator can take into account as something necessarily connected with the dispute. The Scheme does not give the adjudicator power to award costs, but the parties can agree expressly or impliedly to give him the power. HHJ Bowsher QC, Technology & Construction Court 24 January 2000 N appointed J as sub-contractor to carry out works under sub-contract conditions DOM/2. N issued what purported to be a notice to withhold payment on the basis of delay and defective work, and J withdrew from site. N treated this as repudiation and appointed an alternative contractor. J issued an adjudication notice and the Scheme applied. N claimed that J's claim...
  • 13th January 2000
    VHE Construction PLC v RBSTB Trust Co Ltd [2000] EWHC Technology 181
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Sums cannot be set off against adjudicator's decisions. If a valid notice of intention to withhold payment is served, and then overturned by an adjudicator's decision, payment should be made within 7 days of the decision. HHJ Hicks QC, Technology & Construction Court 13 January 2000 V was the main contractor under a JCT. '81 contract with R. The payment provisions provided that V should submit a VAT invoice prior to payment of interim valuations. V served a notice of adjudication in respect of its interim application 4 for which it had served no VAT invoice and for which R had served no notice of intention to withhold. It sought full payment of that application which included sums for variations and loss and expense. The adjudicator made an award...
  • 4th January 2000
    Fastrack Contractors Ltd v Morrison Construction Ltd [2000] BLR 168
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes An adjudicator can enquire into his own jurisdiction, but his decision will not bind the parties and can be reviewed by the court. One dispute can encompass all claims, issues and contentions in issue when the reference was made. HHJ Thornton QC, Technology & Construction Court 4 January 2000 F was a brickwork sub-contractor to M. The work became delayed and the parties blamed each other. F applied for an extension of time; M said it would take some of F's work away; F threatened to take legal action. On 26 February, F submitted an interim application. M served a notice on 2 March saying it was going to monitor F's work. M then served a notice of payment on 10 March reducing several of the amounts claimed. It also said that third parties would...
  • 30th November 1999
    Sherwood & Casson Ltd v Mackenzie HT99000188
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The court can examine a jurisdictional challenge on the basis that the dispute is the same or substantially the same as one previously referred to adjudication, but will only enquire if there are substantial grounds for showing the adjudicator erred. A claim for interim payment and a final account claim may not be the same. HHJ Thornton QC, Technology & Construction Court 30 November 1999 S was a sub-contractor to M, under a contract incorporating the provisions of JCT. '80. The sub-contract contained no adjudication clause so the Scheme for Construction Contracts applied. In the first adjudication, S sought payment of variations contained within an interim application and was awarded £6,631.30. It then submitted its Final Account which...
  • 18th November 1999
    Homer Burgess Ltd v Chirex (Annan) Ltd [2000] BLR 124 Outer Court
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Where parts of an award are valid, and parts made without jurisdiction, the Court may reduce the award and ask the adjudicator to decide which parts of the award were within jurisdiction. Lord MacFadyen, Outer House, Court of Session 18 November 1999 In his previous decision on the construction of the word "plant", Lord MacFadyen found that the adjudicator's decision was, to a substantial extent, beyond his jurisdiction, since much of H's contract was not a "construction contract" within the meaning of the Act. C had not maintained that the whole of the parties' dispute fell outside the adjudicator's jurisdiction, so the Court had to decide what order to make in relation to the small area that was within his jurisdiction. The Court had two options: reduce...
  • 17th November 1999
    Bouygues UK Ltd v Dahl-Jensen UK Ltd [1999] HT99000/99
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The court will look at the subject of the reference to see whether the adjudicator has exceeded the terms of the reference but will give a fair, natural and sensible interpretation to his decision in the light of disputes that are the subject of the reference. The court should guard against characterising a mistaken answer to an issue that lies in the scope of the reference as an excess of jurisdiction. Dyson J, Technology & Construction Court 17 November 1999 D was the mechanical sub-contractor to B. The contract incorporated the CIC Model Adjudication Procedure (2nd edition). D began work on 15 April 1998, and B purported to determine the sub-contract on 8 July 1999. D issued its notice to adjudicate in August 1999 claiming sums for additional...