Cubitt Building and Interiors Ltd v Richardson Roofing (Industrial) Ltd [electronic resource]
Cubitt Building and Interiors Ltd v Richardson Roofing (Industrial) Ltd [electronic resource]
- 2008
[2008] EWHC 1020 (TCC), 9 May 2008. The case considers when a contract is formed between an employer and a contractor; whether a party should be restrained from continuing with an arbitration; and whether adjudication should be enable before any further proceedings. Cubitt Building and Interiors Limited (C) sent a tender enquiry to Richardson Roofing (R), who gave its quote after a second request. A pre-contract meeting was held where substantial agreements were reached. Soon after (C) sent a standard letter of intent requesting to accept it as notification of instructions to proceed with the work for a set price. (R) did not sign neither returned the letter. As stipulated in the letter, a formal subcontract would be sent to Richardson, who still did not sign it. The judge had to decide if a contract was formed and when; and if Richardson should stop the arbitration that he started in favour of an adjudication. Held: The judge decided that the contract was formed at the pre-contract meeting as substantial agreements were taken then. The judge considered that a party cannot be forced to stop an arbitration of litigation in accordance with the contract, unless the contract specifically states that disputes must be decided by adjudication in the first instance.
HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996 S107
DOM/1
ARBITRATION ACT 1996
JCT STANDARD FORM OF BUILDING CONTRACT PRIVATE WITH QUANTITIES (1998 EDITION)
CUBITT BUILDING AND INTERIORS LTD V RICHARDSON ROOFING (INDUSTRIAL) LTD
POSEIDON FREIGHT FORWARDING LTD V DAVIES TURNER SOUTHERN LTD
DGT STEEL AND CLADDING LTD V CUBITT BUILDING AND INTERIORS LTD
BRITISH STEEL CORPORATION V CLEVELAND BRIDGE AND ENGINEERING CO
ROBERTSON V FRENCH
England and Wales--1543-
[2008] EWHC 1020 (TCC), 9 May 2008. The case considers when a contract is formed between an employer and a contractor; whether a party should be restrained from continuing with an arbitration; and whether adjudication should be enable before any further proceedings. Cubitt Building and Interiors Limited (C) sent a tender enquiry to Richardson Roofing (R), who gave its quote after a second request. A pre-contract meeting was held where substantial agreements were reached. Soon after (C) sent a standard letter of intent requesting to accept it as notification of instructions to proceed with the work for a set price. (R) did not sign neither returned the letter. As stipulated in the letter, a formal subcontract would be sent to Richardson, who still did not sign it. The judge had to decide if a contract was formed and when; and if Richardson should stop the arbitration that he started in favour of an adjudication. Held: The judge decided that the contract was formed at the pre-contract meeting as substantial agreements were taken then. The judge considered that a party cannot be forced to stop an arbitration of litigation in accordance with the contract, unless the contract specifically states that disputes must be decided by adjudication in the first instance.
HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996 S107
DOM/1
ARBITRATION ACT 1996
JCT STANDARD FORM OF BUILDING CONTRACT PRIVATE WITH QUANTITIES (1998 EDITION)
CUBITT BUILDING AND INTERIORS LTD V RICHARDSON ROOFING (INDUSTRIAL) LTD
POSEIDON FREIGHT FORWARDING LTD V DAVIES TURNER SOUTHERN LTD
DGT STEEL AND CLADDING LTD V CUBITT BUILDING AND INTERIORS LTD
BRITISH STEEL CORPORATION V CLEVELAND BRIDGE AND ENGINEERING CO
ROBERTSON V FRENCH
England and Wales--1543-