- Home
- Nomination
- UK Cases
- Overseas Cases
- Panel
- Guidance
- Glossary
- Legislation
- England & Wales
- Wales
- Scotland
- Northern Ireland
- Australia (Australian Capital Territory)
- Australia (New South Wales)
- Australia (Northern Territory)
- Australia (Queensland)
- Australia (Southern Territory)
- Australia (Tasmania)
- Australia (Victoria)
- Australia (Western Australia)
- Eire
- Isle of Man
- Malaysia
- New Zealand
- Singapore
- Links
- Contact Us
England Cases
There are over 300 English cases in our database. This page shows all the cases by default, but you can filter the list by using the search tool above. You can search within the title, key terms, court name, judge's name and case notes fields by inputting a word, or words, or part of a word, or a phrase, into the search box.
-
27th July 2004A&S Enterprises v Kema [2004] QBD HT 04 199This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The content of the adjudicator's decision in which he criticised the non-availability of a representative of the employer for a meeting, together with his actions during the course of the adjudication, was felt by the court to be evidence that there was a real possibility of bias on his part and that he was therefore in breach of the requirements of natural justice. As a result his decision was not enforced. His Honour Judge Seymour QC, Technology and Construction Court 27 July 2004 A & S Enterprises Ltd ("A&S") were employed by Kema Holdings Limited ("Kema") to develop a site in Derbyshire. In July 2003, the parties entered into a JCT Standard Form with Contractor's Design 1998 contract with various amendments. Following the non-payment...
-
15th July 2004Roscco Civ Eng v Dwr Cymru Cyfyngedic [2004] TCC HT-03-190This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes On the enforcement of an adjudicator's decision a party can be estopped from denying the adjudicator's jurisdiction if that party had earlier represented that the adjudicator had jurisdiction or that there was a common understanding between the parties to that effect. Also, an adjudicator can order the referring party to make a payment to the responding party if it is implicit in the referred dispute that the adjudicator is required to decide the responding party's entitlement and/or under paragraphs 13 and 20 of the Scheme (when it applies). Recorder Dermod O'Brien QC, Technology and Construction Court 15 July 2004 Rossco Civil Engineering was a partnership carrying on business as civil engineering contractors ("the Partnership"). Welsh Water ("WW")...
-
25th June 2004Connex S.E. Ltd v MJ Building Services Group [2004] EWHC 1518
-
11th June 2004William Verry Ltd. v North West London Communal Mikvah [2004] 1 BLISS 24This 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 in his decision that is within his jurisdiction but potentially vitiates his decision, the Courts may order a stay of enforcement of that decision pending the outcome of a future adjudication on the same issues. Judge Anthony Thornton QC, Technology and Construction Court 11 June 2004 William Verry (“Verry”) was engaged by North West London Communal Mikvah (North West) to carry out certain building works on the JCT standard form of contract, private with quantities, 1998 edition. A dispute arose between the parties as to the valuation of works and an adjudicator assessed the sum that would be due under a certain Interim Certificate. After the adjudicator issued his decision in that adjudication,...
-
28th May 2004Alstom v Jarvis (No2) [2004] EWHC 1285This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes For the purposes of the Scheme, in the context of the contract in question, the "value of work" was that which the paying party considered to be due under the contract having taken account of answers to queries. Determining what sum is due under the contract does not generally involve the issue of a withholding notice. The party making the payment can still establish what is truly due or to be paid by use of the appropriate contractual procedure or proceedings. HHJ Humphrey Lloyd, London TCC. 28 May 2004 Alstom employed Jarvis as its subcontractor for works under the I Chem E Model Form for Process Plants – Sub Contracts, with bespoke amendments. Jarvis were to be paid the cost of the works and a management fee, and the contract...
-
12th May 2004McAlpine PPS Pipeline Systems Joint Venture v Transco Plc [2004] EWHC 2030 (TCC)This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes This recent case in the TCC provides useful guidance on the nature of a dispute referred to adjudication and the conduct of the adjudicator who is appointed to determine it. Judge John Toulmin QC, Technology and Construction Court 12 May 2004 Transco plc (“Transco”) engaged McAlpine PPS Pipeline Systems Joint Venture (“McAlpine”) to carry out works in relation to the construction of 37 km of steel pipeline in Kent. The contract incorporated the NEC standard form of contract. A dispute emerged concerning McAlpine’s entitlement to interest on payments for compensation events. The matter was referred to adjudication. McAlpine issued its notice of referral to adjudication on 17 November 2003. In the notice, McAlpine said...
-
5th April 2004AWG Construction Services Ltd v Rockingham Motor Speedway Ltd [2004] EWCH 888This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes An adjudicator has no jurisdiction to decide issues not referred to him for a decision within the referral notice. Without prejudice to this principle, a party must have a sufficient opportunity to consider any new material that is submitted during the adjudication. Where a decision relates to a number of disputes, the decisions on unchallenged claims should be enforced immediately. Judge John Toulmin QC, Technology and Construction Court 5 April 2004 Rockingham Motor Speedway (“Rockingham”) entered into a contract with AWG Construction (“AWG”) for the design and construction of a new racing track, building and a grandstand, and certain tunnels, near Corby in Northamptonshire. At the track’s first meeting,...