Harris Calnan Construction Co. Ltd v Ridgewood (Kensington) Ltd [electronic resource]
Harris Calnan Construction Co. Ltd v Ridgewood (Kensington) Ltd [electronic resource]
- 2007
[2007] EWHC 2738 (TCC). 15 November 2007. An adjudicator's findings can be binding if a party fails to reserve its position on disputed points. The applicant company (H) appealed for summary judgement in its claim against the respondent company (R), and an order for costs on the indemnity basis. An adjudicator had rejected R's challenge to his jurisdiction, and found there was a contract in writing. H was awarded a sum. R did not pay, so H sought summary enforcement. R maintained the adjudicator did not have jurisdiction because R was based in Jersey and the claim had not been properly served. Held: Application granted; R ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis as enforcement proceedings had been necessary and foreseeable. The adjudicator's decision was binding because the parties had agreed to be bound by his conclusions when the jurisdiction objection was first raised. The JCT 2005 Form made clear that English courts had jurisdiction. Leaving out the statement of ground from the claim form did not justify saying there had been no service at all.
HARRIS CALNAN CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD V RIDGEWOOD (KENSINGTON) LTD
JCT DESIGN AND BUILD CONTRACT (2005 EDITION)
England and Wales--1543-
[2007] EWHC 2738 (TCC). 15 November 2007. An adjudicator's findings can be binding if a party fails to reserve its position on disputed points. The applicant company (H) appealed for summary judgement in its claim against the respondent company (R), and an order for costs on the indemnity basis. An adjudicator had rejected R's challenge to his jurisdiction, and found there was a contract in writing. H was awarded a sum. R did not pay, so H sought summary enforcement. R maintained the adjudicator did not have jurisdiction because R was based in Jersey and the claim had not been properly served. Held: Application granted; R ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis as enforcement proceedings had been necessary and foreseeable. The adjudicator's decision was binding because the parties had agreed to be bound by his conclusions when the jurisdiction objection was first raised. The JCT 2005 Form made clear that English courts had jurisdiction. Leaving out the statement of ground from the claim form did not justify saying there had been no service at all.
HARRIS CALNAN CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD V RIDGEWOOD (KENSINGTON) LTD
JCT DESIGN AND BUILD CONTRACT (2005 EDITION)
England and Wales--1543-