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.

Show all casesprevious 1 2...51 52 535455 56 57 58 59 next

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
12th December 2000
ABB Zantingh v Zedal [2001] BLR 66

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes When considering whether works fall within the exemption in section 105(2) of HGCRA, the Court should consider the nature of the whole site, and ask what is its primary purpose. Here, works involved in the installation of power generators at a printing works did not fall within the exception and were construction operations. HHJ Bowsher QC, Technology & Construction Court 12 December 2000 Scottish and Southern Energy (SSE) agreed to construct diesel powered electricity generation stations for Mirror Group Publishing who were concerned about loss of power due to the "Millennium bug." SSE sub-contracted the design, build and maintenance of the power generation sites to ABB, who sub-sub-contracted with Z for supply, installation, labelling, termination...

Click here to read more
24th November 2000
Harwood v Lantrode [2000] TCC

This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit http://www.cms-cmck.com/Construction/Construction-Disputes An adjudicator's decision will be enforced even if the losing party has commenced proceedings for final determination of the dispute. Section 111 notices to withhold payment apply to equitable set-offs. A stay of execution was granted as a petition for liquidation had been presented. HHJ Seymour QC, Technology and Construction Court 24 November 2000 The nature of the dispute that was referred to adjudication is unreported, however on 13 October 2000 the Adjudicator issued his decision in favour of Harwood to the tune of £208,309.17. Lantrode refused pay and so Harwood brought this application to enforce the Adjudicator's decision. Lantrode resisted payment on the grounds that: to enforce payment would be an abuse of court process as Lantrode...

Click here to read more

Show all casesprevious 1 2...51 52 535455 56 57 58 59 next