Construction Case Update - Adjudication - Part 3 of 2018

Natural Justice E7 Building Services Ltd v R G Carter Cambridge Ltd The adjudicator was entitled to refer clauses in the contract not expressly relied on by either party. It was part of the materials before him and on which the parties had had every chance to comment. Stay of execution—effect of allegation of fraud— addition of new (g) to the Wimbledon factors Gosvenor London Ltd v Aygun Aluminium Ltd The need for temporary finality of adjudicators’ decisions coupled with the defendant’s failure to raise known fraud in the adjudication meant that that it was correct to grant judgment on the decision. Comments made on the circumstances in which fraud could be raised on an application for summary judgment or to stay enforcement. In the exceptional circumstances of this case, the risk of dissipation or disposal of the judgment sum by the claimant, coupled with unsatisfactory evidence of its financial position (and possibly unanswered allegations of fraud) led the Court to impose a stay of execution of the judgment. The Court added a new principle or factor (g) to those listed in the judgment in Wimbledon v Vago , albeit it would rarely apply and would require a high standard of proof of the risk. Stay of execution—financial position of both parties Energo A.S. v Bester Generacion UK Ltd It was for a defendant who relied on its inability to pay the judgement debt to support the claim by written statement including evidence of means. Even though the evidence of the claimant as to its ability to repay the judgment debt if called upon to do so was unsatisfactory, the Court refused in its discretion to stay execution.


Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online