Wimbledon Construction Company 2000 Limited v Derek Vago
Wimbledon Construction Company 2000 Limited v Derek Vago
- 2005
[2005] EWHC 1086 (TCC), 20 May 2005. Examines if there can be a stay on the enforcement of an adjudicator's award pending an arbitrator's decision where there is cause for concern that the party the adjudicator had made the award to might not be able to repay it at a later date. W commenced enforcement proceedings for an adjudicator's award made in relation to a dispute over works the company had carried out at V's house. At the same time V commenced arbitration proceedings disputing that award and sought an order that the enforcement be stayed until the arbitration proceedings had been concluded on the grounds that W's financial position was uncertain. "Held": the application was dismissed as V had not demonstrated the probability that W would be unable to repay the award, and because W's financial problems were largely due to V's refusal to pay the award.
WIMBLEDON CONSTRUCTION CO 2000 LTD V VAGO
HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996
JCT AGREEMENT FOR MINOR BUILDING WORKS (1998 EDITION)
CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES PART 50
BOUYGUES UK LTD V DAHL-JENSEN UK LTD
ABSOLUTE RENTALS LTD V GENCOR ENTERPRISES LTD
HERSCHEL ENGINEERING LTD V BREEN PROPERTY LTD
COMPANIES ACT 1985 S726(1)
RAINFORD HOUSE LTD V CADOGAN LTD
TOTAL M&E SERVICES LTD V ABB BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES LTD
AWG CONSTRUCTION LTD V ROCKINGHAM MOTOR SPEEDWAY LTD
SIR LINDSAY PARKINSON AND CO V TRIPLAN
[2005] EWHC 1086 (TCC), 20 May 2005. Examines if there can be a stay on the enforcement of an adjudicator's award pending an arbitrator's decision where there is cause for concern that the party the adjudicator had made the award to might not be able to repay it at a later date. W commenced enforcement proceedings for an adjudicator's award made in relation to a dispute over works the company had carried out at V's house. At the same time V commenced arbitration proceedings disputing that award and sought an order that the enforcement be stayed until the arbitration proceedings had been concluded on the grounds that W's financial position was uncertain. "Held": the application was dismissed as V had not demonstrated the probability that W would be unable to repay the award, and because W's financial problems were largely due to V's refusal to pay the award.
WIMBLEDON CONSTRUCTION CO 2000 LTD V VAGO
HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996
JCT AGREEMENT FOR MINOR BUILDING WORKS (1998 EDITION)
CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES PART 50
BOUYGUES UK LTD V DAHL-JENSEN UK LTD
ABSOLUTE RENTALS LTD V GENCOR ENTERPRISES LTD
HERSCHEL ENGINEERING LTD V BREEN PROPERTY LTD
COMPANIES ACT 1985 S726(1)
RAINFORD HOUSE LTD V CADOGAN LTD
TOTAL M&E SERVICES LTD V ABB BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES LTD
AWG CONSTRUCTION LTD V ROCKINGHAM MOTOR SPEEDWAY LTD
SIR LINDSAY PARKINSON AND CO V TRIPLAN