Image from Google Jackets

The Act requires written terms

By: Series: Construction News ; (6784) 19 September 2002, 22(1)Publication details: 2002Subject(s): Summary: Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 s107 says that qualifying contracts must be in writing if the Act is to apply. The meaning of the phrase has been considered in the case of "RJT Consulting engineers v DM Engineering (NI)" (2001) where both RJT and DM had an oral contract of construction operations as defined in s105 of the Act. This point was not disputed by either party, but RJT argued that the whole agreement had to be in writing if the contract was to be bound by the Act and the adjudicator to have any jurisdiction. The significance of the case being that all the terms and not just the existence of a contract should be evident in writing if the contract is to qualify being referred to adjudication.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Journal article London Journal article ABS66002 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 120177-1001

Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 s107 says that qualifying contracts must be in writing if the Act is to apply. The meaning of the phrase has been considered in the case of "RJT Consulting engineers v DM Engineering (NI)" (2001) where both RJT and DM had an oral contract of construction operations as defined in s105 of the Act. This point was not disputed by either party, but RJT argued that the whole agreement had to be in writing if the contract was to be bound by the Act and the adjudicator to have any jurisdiction. The significance of the case being that all the terms and not just the existence of a contract should be evident in writing if the contract is to qualify being referred to adjudication.

Previous
Back to results
Next
Close