Synchronise watches
Series: Building ; 266(8207) 23 November 2001, 50-51(2)Publication details: 2001Subject(s): Summary: Discusses the case "Sindall Ltd v Solland" which deals with two key issues. Sindall failed to give contract administrator Michael Edwards & Associates (MEA) enough time to respond to its complaint before starting adjudication which meant the first adjudicator had no right to adjudicate; MEA accused Sindall of not proceeding reasonably and diligently yet failed to give Sindall the correct extension of time which meant MEA had no grounds for giving notice.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | ABS64851 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 115977-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
Discusses the case "Sindall Ltd v Solland" which deals with two key issues. Sindall failed to give contract administrator Michael Edwards & Associates (MEA) enough time to respond to its complaint before starting adjudication which meant the first adjudicator had no right to adjudicate; MEA accused Sindall of not proceeding reasonably and diligently yet failed to give Sindall the correct extension of time which meant MEA had no grounds for giving notice.