London Eco Homes Ltd v Raise Now Ealing Ltd [2025] EWHC 1501 (TCC) District Judge Baldwin (judgment 25 March 2025)
The defendant (RNE) hired the claimant (Eco) to carry out construction works under a JCT intermediate contract with contractor’s design (‘the Contract’). The Contract contained an express term entitling either party to refer any dispute ‘under the contract’ to adjudication. Various disputes arose which the parties agreed to resolve under the terms of a settlement agreement. The settlement agreement provided for the termination of the Contract under its termination provisions, the agreement of the final account, and the payment of an agreed sum by RNE to Eco by instalments under a payment schedule. Eco agreed to procure a warranty and, if necessary, to carry out further works to facilitate the procurement of the warranty. The terms were expressed to be in full and final settlement of all claims under the Contract and there was an ‘entire agreement’ clause. RNE did not make payment as agreed and Eco started adjudication proceedings to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. RNE challenged the jurisdiction of the adjudicator on the grounds that the settlement agreement was not a construction contract and contained no right of adjudication. They also raised a defence that the payment was not due as Eco had failed to procure the warranty. However, they later accepted that payment was due subject to the jurisdiction argument. The adjudicator decided there was jurisdiction and ordered RNE to pay the sum claimed. RNE did not make payment and Eco started proceedings in court and applied for summary judgment. RNE appeared by a Director and Eco by Counsel, and the application was heard in March by District Judge John Baldwin. The Judge declined to consider a claim that the adjudication decision was procured by fraud, which was only raised by RNE for the first time late in the hearing and was unsupported by any evidence. Eco relied on two alternative ways in which the adjudicator would have had jurisdiction.
Was the settlement agreement a ‘construction contract’ carrying a right of adjudication?
Eco contended that as the settlement agreement provided for the carrying out of ‘construction operations’ it was a ‘construction contract’ within the meaning of the Act, with an implied right to refer any dispute to adjudication. The Judge found that the settlement agreement did provide for the carrying out of construction operations. But it also provided for other matters, such as the termination of the Contract, settlement of
4
www.ciarb.org
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online