Points out that when a court rules that a contractor should be paid in a dispute, the payer must issue a withholding notice if it wishes to pursue its claim or it could face a winding-up order. In the recent case of "Guardi Shoes v Datum Contracts" (ChD [2002] CILL 1934) Guardi (G) complained there were a significant number of defects in the work carried out by their shopfitting contractors Datum (D) and refused to allow D to return to remedy the alleged defects, and refused further payment. D took the matter to adjudication, which set a sum of £108 000 to be paid to D. Payments were begun in instalments, but then G defaulted. D issued a statutory demand for the unpaid amount, giving G 21 days to satisfy payment or face presentation of a winding-up petition, which duly took place. G cross-claimed for the defects, arguing they were likely to equal or exceed the remaining due amount. The judge ruled G had not taken the opportunity to serve a counternotice, and ruled a notice must be served within five days of the due payment date, which can double as a withholding notice, or risk a statutory demand for payment.