- 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.
-
3rd July 2002J.T.Mackley v Gosport Marina Ltd [2002] EWHC 1315This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Section 108 HGCRA 1996 does not of itself create a right to refer a dispute, once decided by an adjudicator, to arbitration. Where reliance is placed on an arbitration clause in a contract, the ability to commence an arbitration and how this should be done falls to be determined by that arbitration clause Seymour QC 3 July 2002, TCC G contracted M to carry out certain land reclamation works at a marina. The contract incorporated the ICE conditions of contract with certain amendments. Clause 66 of the conditions concerned the settlement of disputes. It provided that a dispute arose when one party served on the engineer appointed under the contract a notice in writing, stating the nature of the dispute. It also provided that every such dispute should...
-
2nd May 2002Impresa Castelli SpA v Cola Holdings Ltd [2002] EWHC 1363 (TCC)This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes On the facts of this case and the particular dispute resolution clause, a party was not bound to adjudicate before proceeding to arbitration or litigation as the adjudication provisions related to works which were ongoing and not to events after termination. HHJ Anthony Thornton QC, Technology and Construction Court 2 May 2002 CH employed IC as the main contractor under a JCT 1981 Edition with Contractor's Design, to construct a large four star hotel in London. The contract sum was for £10.35m. The parties were in dispute from an early stage and the project was subject to delay. In early 2000 some of the disputes were referred to adjudication. In August 2001, IC instituted its own legal proceedings for loss and expense and CH counterclaimed....
-
18th April 2002R.G.Carter Ltd v Edmund Nuttall [2002] HT-02-121This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The Court has no power to revoke the appointment of an adjudicator or to appoint a new adjudicator in his place. At most the Court will make a declaration as to the validity of an adjudicator's appointment. Judge Bowsher QC 18 April 2002, TCC R entered into a sub-contract with E incorporating the DOM/1 provisions in about September 1999 for the construction of concrete works to the sub-structure and the building frame and ancillary works for a new Heritage Centre and Library in Norwich. The sub-contract contained contractual provisions for adjudication that complied with the requirements of HGCRA 1996. Between July 2000 and November 2001 there were three adjudications. A fourth dispute then arose about extensions of time and claims for loss and...
-
12th April 2002Martin Girt v Page Bentley [2002] EWHC 2434This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes The rules of natural justice apply to adjudications, but the mere fact that an adjudicator has not complied with those rules does not mean that his or her award is unenforceable. What matters is whether the breach of natural justice had a prejudicial effect on the party opposing the enforcement of the determination. HHJ Wilcox, Technology and Construction Court 12 April 2002 G entered into a contract with B to provide labour-only plastering works at a building in Scotland. A dispute arose as to the amount owing to G for performing those works. The dispute was referred to adjudication. The Adjudicator determined the dispute in G's favour, awarding it some £53,000 if G could produce a VAT certificate to B, and some £18,000 if G could...
-
12th April 2002Parsons Plastics (Research and Development) Ltd v Purac Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 459This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes If the contract terms provide for it, a party may be entitled to set-off a counterclaim where a contract is not governed by HGCRA against an adjudicator's decision if that counterclaim has not been determined by the adjudicator. LJ Pill, LJ Mummery and LJ Latham, Court of Appeal, Civil Division 12th April 2002 Purac were the main contractors under a contract for the design and construction of a sewerage plant. Purac entered into a written sub-contract with Parsons for the supply of an odour control package at the works. Purac became dissatisfied with Parson's lack of progress and in an attempt to expedite matters made a payment direct to Parsons' steel supplier. Purac then declined Parsons' application for payment 3 under milestones of Schedule...
-
12th April 2002Balfour Beatty v Mayor & Burgess of L.B. of Lambeth [2002] BLR 288 : [2002] EWHC 597This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes A critical path analysis is necessary for an adjudication concerning extensions of time and the deduction of liquidated damages to be carried out methodically and fairly. However, an adjudicator who constructs the referring party's case for it and does not give the responding party reasonable opportunity to comment upon the case it has to meet is not acting fairly and impartially and his decision will not be enforced H Lloyd QC 12th April 2002 The parties entered into a contract for the refurbishment of a building that incorporated JCT standard terms. B was granted three extensions of time. However, two certificates of non-completion were issued, which entitled L to claim damages for delay. B claimed it was entitled to further extensions of time...
-
25th March 2002Chamberlain Carpentry & Joinery Ltd v Alfred McAlpine [2002] EWHC 514 (TCC)This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes What constitutes a "single dispute" is a question of fact. It is possible that a substantial dispute with a number of different elements may constitute a "single dispute" R Seymour QC 25 March 2002, TCC A sub-contracted C to carry out various works in relation to a hotel. The Sub-Contract entitled either party to refer any dispute to adjudication in accordance with the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 and in accordance with the Alfred McAlpine Special Projects Adjudication Rules (June 2000 Edition). These Rules provided that the referring party may give written notice of his intention to refer any dispute arising under the contract to adjudication; that such notice must set out and provide the nature and description of the...
-
21st March 2002Edmund Nuttall Ltd v R G Carter Ltd [2002] EWHC 400 (TCC)This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Whilst a dispute can be about a "claim", there is more to a dispute than simply a claim which has not been accepted. For there to be a dispute, there must have been an opportunity for the protagonists to consider the whole package of arguments advanced and the facts relied on by each side and to formulate reasoned arguments. Whilst a refinement of the arguments may not alter fundamentally the "dispute", a party cannot abandon wholesale facts or arguments and contend that because the "claim" remained the same the "dispute" remains the same. If the dispute does not remain the same an adjudicator appointed in relation to the reformulated dispute acts without jurisdiction R Seymour QC, Technology and Construction Court 21 March 2002 C engaged N under...