Makers UK Limited v Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Camden [electronic resource]
Makers UK Limited v Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Camden [electronic resource]
- 2008
[2008] EWHC 1836 (TCC), 25 July 2008. The case turns around the extent in which a party makes representation to a nominating body to choose a particular adjudicator. Makers UK Limited (M) accuses Camden (C) of a wrongful determination of this employment under the contract. Its clause 9A provided that the adjudicator could be an individual agreed on by both parties or and individual nominated by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). (M)'s solicitor contacted a qualified solicitor on the RIBA panel to check his willingness to act as an adjudicator. He subsequently proposed this adjudicator to the RIBA panel who appointed him. (C) disputed the validity of the nomination on the basis that the adjudicator was chosen unilaterally by opponent parties and that the adjudicator took a biased decision. Held: The judge concluded that it was possible to make a representation for an individual to be chosen as adjudicator. The Court advised to limit unilateral contact with adjudicators and to make enquiries of potential adjudicators in writing. The Court also recommended nominating bodies to review their rules and consider whether to accept representations and if so, to consider if notice should be given to the other party.
HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996
JCT INTERMEDIATE FORM OF BUILDING CONTRACT FOR WORKS OF SIMPLE CONTENT (1998 EDITION)
MAKERS UK LIMITED V THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN
BP REFINERY (WESTERNPOINT) PTY LTD V SHIRE OF HASTINGS
MOSVOLDS REDERI A/S V FOOD CORP OF INDIA
CROSSLEY V FAITHFUL & GOULD HOLDINGS
AMEC CAPITAL PROJECTS LTD V WHITEFRIARS CITY ESTATES LTD
PORTER V MAGILL
England and Wales--1543-
[2008] EWHC 1836 (TCC), 25 July 2008. The case turns around the extent in which a party makes representation to a nominating body to choose a particular adjudicator. Makers UK Limited (M) accuses Camden (C) of a wrongful determination of this employment under the contract. Its clause 9A provided that the adjudicator could be an individual agreed on by both parties or and individual nominated by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). (M)'s solicitor contacted a qualified solicitor on the RIBA panel to check his willingness to act as an adjudicator. He subsequently proposed this adjudicator to the RIBA panel who appointed him. (C) disputed the validity of the nomination on the basis that the adjudicator was chosen unilaterally by opponent parties and that the adjudicator took a biased decision. Held: The judge concluded that it was possible to make a representation for an individual to be chosen as adjudicator. The Court advised to limit unilateral contact with adjudicators and to make enquiries of potential adjudicators in writing. The Court also recommended nominating bodies to review their rules and consider whether to accept representations and if so, to consider if notice should be given to the other party.
HOUSING GRANTS, CONSTRUCTION AND REGENERATION ACT 1996
JCT INTERMEDIATE FORM OF BUILDING CONTRACT FOR WORKS OF SIMPLE CONTENT (1998 EDITION)
MAKERS UK LIMITED V THE MAYOR AND BURGESSES OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN
BP REFINERY (WESTERNPOINT) PTY LTD V SHIRE OF HASTINGS
MOSVOLDS REDERI A/S V FOOD CORP OF INDIA
CROSSLEY V FAITHFUL & GOULD HOLDINGS
AMEC CAPITAL PROJECTS LTD V WHITEFRIARS CITY ESTATES LTD
PORTER V MAGILL
England and Wales--1543-