7. Summary Enforcement—permission to continue proceedings under s.252 Insolvency Act 1986 Raymond Jeffrey (t/a Premier Construction Services) v David Steene Permission was given to continue enforcement and enter judgment, with a stay of execution, where the proposed IVA was only notified after the adjudication decision and the enforcement proceedings, the Claimant had incurred the costs of the enforcement, and the claim was not fully accepted by the IVA. The IVA had not by then been approved and the judgment would not put other creditors at an unfair disadvantage. Jurisdiction—more than one contract—adjudicator’s power to determine own jurisdiction Maelor Foods Ltd v Rawlings Consulting (UK) Ltd This case followed on from a stay to arbitration of an attempted part 8 challenge to an adjudicator’s award (see below). Whilst an adjudicator could not make a binding decision on an issue that amounted to his ruling on his own jurisdiction, where he had to decide the issue as part of the dispute before him, he was entitled to do so “when substance and jurisdiction overlap.” A stay of execution was refused. Stay to Arbitration—whether ‘dispute’ was “in connection with” enforcement Maelor Foods Ltd v Rawlings Consulting (UK) Ltd A challenge of an adjudicator’s decision under Part 8 based on issues of law, as to the validity of a payment notice and what sums were due, were not “in connection with” enforcement. The wording of the Part 8 claim was highly significant. Ultimately the dispute here was one about the parties’ actions under the contract and that dispute had to be stayed to arbitration.
Stay of execution pending provision of guarantee bond BN Rendering Ltd v Everwarm Ltd
Execution of a judgment was stayed in light of large movements of cash between the Claimant and its sole director pending the provision of suitable security. Stay of execution—relevance of fraud not raised in adjudication Assesmont Ltd v Brookvex IMS Ltd An issue of fraud which could and should have been raised in the adjudication was not relevant to enforcement. It could still be relevant to whether the Court should stay execution. However on the facts, there was no clear and unambiguous evidence of fraud so a stay of execution was refused.
5
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs