C claimed payment for the construction of a new sports facility at D’s premises. D counterclaimed for unfinished and defective work. C had tendered for the works on a JCT standard form of contract. However, D decided to appoint C to undertake the works under letters of intent, as the execution of certain documents was to be deferred until after the grant of planning permission. After completetion of the main elements of the work, D refused to sign the contractual documents, insisting that it wou ...
|
C, a building contractor, was engaged to construct a mikvah by D. Following completion of construction, C commenced adjudication proceedings in respect of the final account. An award for a substantial sum of money was made by the adjudicator, which D failed to pay. C issued proceedings to enforce the adjudicator’s award by way of summary judgment under CPR 24. Prior to the hearing, it became apparent that D was an unincorporated association and thus had no legal personae. C issued an applicat ...
|
The parties had entered into a contract which expressly provided that any dispute should be resolved by an arbitrator under arbitration that would be governed by Swiss law and have its seat in Switzerland. A dispute arose, and the appointed arbitrator proposed to hold a hearing into his own jurisdiction. The appellant alleged that the provision relating to arbitration had been procured by fraud, and applied for an interim injunction to restrain the arbitrator from holding a hearing into his ow ...
|
Civil Proof - Breach of Building Contract:
This case was related to certain defects in a swimming pool forming part of a leisure centre at Fisherrow, usselburgh. The leisure centre was constructed for the pursuers by the defenders under a design and build contract. The defenders pled that any obligation which they may have had to pay damages to the pursuers had been extinguished by the five year negative prescription provided for under section 6 of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973. A preliminary proof before answer was ...
|
D resisted enforcement of an adjudicator’s award on the basis of breach of natural justice, in that the adjudicator had wrongly ignored two expert reports. The adjudicator had found that the two reports contained new evidence not available to the parties at the time the dispute had crystallized. Jackson J granted C summary judgment, finding that, although there was considerable force in the contention that the adjudicator should have taken the experts’ reports into account, at worst the adjudi ...
|
This was a case concerned with solicitors’ negligence, but the findings on what constitutes “knowledge” for the purposes of section 14A of the Limitation Act 1980 are likely to have wide application in the law of negligence of construction professionals. Their Lordships held that “knowledge” meant knowing with sufficient confidence to justify embarking on the preliminaries to the issue of a claim; and that knowledge that damage was “attributable” in whole or in part to the defendant’s acts or o ...
|
This case concerned an agreement for the provision of software personnel in the UK which were subject to Indian law and an arbitration clause. Arbitration proceedings were commenced by the appellant in India, but the respondent notified the arbitrator that he was ill and unable to answer the claim, although he made some written submissions. An arbitration award was made in the respondent’s absence at a hearing where additional allegations (of male fides) were made against the respondent. The a ...
|
C and D were parties to a construction contract which incorporated the CIC Model Adjudication Procedure, 3rd edition. They had also concluded a contract based on the RIBA Conditions of Engagement for the Appointment of an Architect, clause 9.2 of which deleted clause 29 of the Model Adjudication Procedure and provided instead for the adjudicator to have power to direct the payment of legal costs and expenses as part of the Adjudicator's decision. D had referred a dispute to adjudication but ab ...
|
C designed, constructed and operated energy plants and had agreed to provide energy services at D's new paper mill for a period of 15 years. Pursuant to the agreement C was to charge D an annual charge (comprising of a finance element aswell as the operational costs) which was payable in 12 monthly instalments. Clause 14.4 of the contract enabled C to terminate the contract if D was in material breach of its obligation to pay charges. D failed to pay 3 separate monthly instalments because it di ...
|
C sought to enforce two decisions by an adjudicator against 4 defendants who had, at various times, been trustee of an unincorporated association (“the Club”). The Club had purported to employ C to construct a sports complex. HHJ Coulson rejected Ds’ argument that the adjudicator had had no jurisdiction to reach either decision on the grounds that the proper defendants were each and every member of the Club. HHJ Coulson enforced the decisions against the 4 defendants on the basis that a trust ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 |