contract, which contained adjudication provisions. It preserved the right to adjudicate any dispute arising under the settlement agreement.
Jurisdiction – power to award payment to a responding party VMA Services Ltd v Project One London Ltd [2025] EWHC 1815 (TCC) Adrian Williamson KC (judgment 18 July 2025) In a true value adjudication commenced by a contractor, the adjudicator found the responding sub-contractor entitled to payment of what he decided was the notified sum. The court enforced the decision, finding that it had power to order payment of a sum that the adjudicator determined was due. Jurisdiction – application of residential occupier exception and overturning adjudicator’s order as to fees RBH Building Contractors Ltd v Ashley James and Tracy James [2025] EWHC 2005 (TCC) Neil Moody KC (judgment 10 June 2025) On the facts and the evidence, the defendants had a prospect of succeeding in their defence that they had the intention, at the time the contract for construction of a dwelling house was made, of residing in the house, so that the residential occupier in s106 of the Act applied. This was so, despite such intention being in breach of the terms of an undertaking in an agreement with a lender to fund the construction works - and despite the fact the parties later changed their minds and decided to rent, then later sell the house, when completed. It was sufficient that one of the parties acting as employer under the (oral) construction contract was an individual, while the other party was a development company. In the result, the adjudicator had lacked jurisdiction, and the award could not be enforced. The court found that the pay less notice given by the defendants was valid. It stated the sum due as ‘nil’, set out the way in which the sum was calculated to arrive at nil, and, in accordance with case law, could be understood by the parties and provided ‘an agenda for trial’. Following a decision in a Scottish case, the court also decided that it had no power to overturn the adjudicator’s award of fees, even though the result of the adjudication could not stand.
Court decision summaries in full
Jurisdiction – right to adjudicate under a settlement agreement and whether settlement agreement was a construction contract or a variation of the original construction contract
3
www.ciarb.org
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online