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.

  • 2nd October 2013
    KNN Coburn LLP v GD City Holdings Limited [2013] EWHC 2879 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes summary (1) In an adjudication under the Scheme for Construction Contracts, the time for the adjudicator to reach his/her decision runs from the date of the referral notice not the date when the supporting documents are received, except where the nature of the dispute cannot be identified without reference to the supporting documents. (2) A responding party who participates without protest in an adjudication in accordance with a timetable that does not comply with the Scheme may lose any right to object that the adjudicator’s decision has not been reached in time. A referring party who so participates may be taken to have consented to the adjudicator having further time to reach his/her decision under the Scheme. (3) On the facts of this case...
  • 5th September 2013
    CG Group Ltd v Breyer Group Plc [2013] EWHC 2722 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes summary (1) The broad scope of the dispute referred to the Adjudicator in this case meant that he had jurisdiction to decide the case on the basis that he did. (2) Where, as in this case, there were extensive issues raised on the written submissions between the parties in the adjudication which provided a variety of permutations upon which the adjudicator had to decide, the Court should not have to carry out a relatively minute examination of all the arguments and contentions put forward by the parties in the adjudication to seek to determine whether the final permutation in the exact form as found to apply by the adjudicator was or was not specifically highlighted by a party. If the permutation as found is covered by the presented arguments, it should...
  • 29th August 2013
    Parkwood Leisure Ltd v Laing O'Rourke Wales and West Ltd [2013] EWHC 2665 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes summary Depending upon its wording and the relevant contractual background, a collateral warranty can be a “construction contract” for the purposes of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (“HGCRA”) and be subject to the mandatory adjudication regime. Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Akenhead Background In April 2006, Orion Land & Leisure (Cardiff) Ltd (“Orion”) engaged Laing O’Rourke Wales & West Ltd (“LOR”) under a standard JCT design and build contract to design and construct a swimming and leisure facility in Cardiff (the “Contract” and the “Works”). The Works were due to be completed by 21 December 2007. In January 2008...
  • 17th July 2013
    Thameside Construction Company v Steven & Anor [2013] EWHC 2071
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes summary When an adjudicator makes an order that one party must pay another, the order must be honoured and no set-off or withholding against payment of that amount should be permitted. However, there are limited exceptions to this rule, namely where: (1) there is a specified contractual right to a set-off which does not conflict with the statutory requirement for immediate enforcement; (2) an adjudicator has simply declared that an amount is due rather than having directed that it should be paid; and (3) an adjudicator’s decision permits further set-off. Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Akenhead. Background Mr and Mrs Stevens (“Mr and Mrs S”) entered into a contract with Thameside Construction Company Limited (“Thameside”)...
  • 12th July 2013
    ABB Limited v BAM Nuttall Limited [2013] EWHC 1983 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes summary Reliance by an adjudicator on a clause in a contract which had not been referred to or relied upon by either party or raised by the adjudicator before he published his decision, was a material breach of the rules of natural justice. Although courts should be slow to overturn adjudicator’s decisions as it is not the function of the court to be an appellate tribunal for adjudicator’s decisions, the adjudicator’s breach of natural justice was of considerable importance to the outcome of the resolution of the dispute and could well have been decisive. Therefore his decision was invalid and unenforceable. Technology and Construction Court, Mr Justice Akenhead. Background ABB Limited (“ABB”) was a main contractor...
  • 4th July 2013
    Bellway Homes Limited v Seymour )Civil Engineering Contractors) Limited [2013] EWHC 1890 (TCC)
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Summary The Court was asked to resolve the issue of costs between the parties, following the settlement of proceedings at the 11th hour before trial. The proceedings concerned a claim for repayment of a sum of £513,000 in prolongation and increased costs, which had been paid pursuant to an adjudicator’s decision. The claimant finally settled for £146,953 after having paid a sum marginally greater than that to the defendant by way of the release of retention monies which had become payable part way through the proceedings. In deciding which party should be liable for costs, the Court took careful consideration of (i) the terms of the final settlement, (ii) Part 36 and other offers made by the parties, (iii) each party’s approach...
  • 3rd July 2013
    FG Skerritt Ltd v Caledonian Building Systems Ltd [2013] EWHC 1898
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes summary (1) If a claimant in adjudication enforcement proceedings is insolvent, a defendant will normally be entitled to a stay of execution if he has real grounds for a counterclaim that could be raised as a defence by way of equitable set-off in respect of the sum awarded by the Adjudicator. (2) In principle, a bond or guarantee provided by a third party which provides sufficient security for the repayment of the judgment sum is an acceptable way for an insolvent claimant to avoid a stay of execution. In such a case, the defendant is entitled to be provided with security which is equivalent to the security it would have had based on the claimant's financial position at the time when the relevant contract was made. Technology and Construction Court,...
  • 1st July 2013
    National Museums and Galleries on Merseyside v AEW Architects and Designers Limited EWHC 2403 (TCC)
  • 28th June 2013
    Westshield Civil Engineering Ltd v Buckingham Group Contracting Ltd [2013] EWHC 1825
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes Judgement date: 28 June 2013 summary (1) Where an adjudication clause provides that an adjudicator’s decision will be final and binding unless proceedings are issued within a specified period of the decision, it will be sufficient to prevent the decision from becoming final and binding when proceedings are issued by the Court – they do not have to be served as well. (2) Where the parties to a dispute have given an adjudicator permission to determine who are the proper parties to the contract giving rise to the dispute, his decision on that issue will be binding in the same way as any other adjudication decision.  (3) Where the financial position of a party seeking to enforce an adjudicator’s decision is the same as it was when...
  • 23rd May 2013
    Aspect Contracts (Asbestos) Ltd v Higgins Construction Plc [2013] EWHC 1322