([2005] EWHC 2963 TCC). In 1992 M was awarded the concession agreement for the M6 toll road. C, together with three other companies, working in a joint venture, entered into a design and build contract with M. C commenced an adjudication under the contract, seeking to recover extra payment in respect of costs incurred in connection with changes in the road layout. M sought a declaration that C was not entitled to proceed in the adjudication, relying on two clauses in the contract, (1) that C would not take any steps to enforce any rights under the contract pending resolution of equivalent project relief under the concession agreement, (2) that C's entitlement to payment for any changes would not exceed the amounts M was entitled to be paid under the concession agreement. C argued that these clauses purported to deprive it of its rights under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, s108, to adjudicate at any time. "Held": M was not entitled to prevent the adjudication taking place. Any wording in a sub-contract which purports to restrict a sub-contractor's right to refer a dispute to adjudication will either fall away to be replaced by the Scheme for Construction Contracts, or will be construed in a manner compatible with the Act. Furthermore, a state of affairs which prevented C from being paid until M had received a corresponding sum under the concession agreement was precisely what the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act, s113 had been designed to prevent, and contracting parties could not avoid it by using a form of words or drafting technique.