Kier Regional Ltd v City and General (Holborn) Ltd
Language: English Publication details: 2006Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2006] EWHC 848 (TCC) 6 March 2006. K was engaged by C to carry out refurbishment and rebuilding works under a contract which provided for the appointment of an adjudicator under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, s108. A number of references to adjudication were made, in one of which C sought to rely on expert evidence to resist a claim for loss and expenditure. The adjudicator disregarded the evidence on the grounds that it was new evidence which was not known to the parties when the dispute crystallised, and made an award in K's favour. C refused to pay, contending that by wrongfully refusing to consider its expert evidence, the adjudicator had committed a clear breach of natural justice. K brought proceedings to enforce the award. "Held" the decision by the adjudicator to disregard the evidence could not render his decision unenforceable. If an adjudicator refused to consider evidence which, on his analysis of the facts or law, was irrelevant, it was neither a breach of the rules of natural justice nor a failure to consider relevant material. If the adjudicators analysis was erroneous, it might follow that he ought to have considered the evidence; the possibility of this type of error, however, was inherent in the adjudication system, and was not a ground for refusing to enforce the adjudicator's decision.Summary: See L145869| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 133402-1001 |
Browsing Virtual shelves, Shelving location: Online Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
| ONLINE PUBLICATION Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS) | ONLINE PUBLICATION To Part L and back | ONLINE PUBLICATION The changing face of home-ownership in Scotland | ONLINE PUBLICATION Kier Regional Ltd v City and General (Holborn) Ltd | ONLINE PUBLICATION Planning gain supplement - the new consultation | ONLINE PUBLICATION HBF code of conduct launched to help drive up customer service standards | ONLINE PUBLICATION Planning gain supplement - what are the UK's plans? |
[2006] EWHC 848 (TCC) 6 March 2006. K was engaged by C to carry out refurbishment and rebuilding works under a contract which provided for the appointment of an adjudicator under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, s108. A number of references to adjudication were made, in one of which C sought to rely on expert evidence to resist a claim for loss and expenditure. The adjudicator disregarded the evidence on the grounds that it was new evidence which was not known to the parties when the dispute crystallised, and made an award in K's favour. C refused to pay, contending that by wrongfully refusing to consider its expert evidence, the adjudicator had committed a clear breach of natural justice. K brought proceedings to enforce the award. "Held" the decision by the adjudicator to disregard the evidence could not render his decision unenforceable. If an adjudicator refused to consider evidence which, on his analysis of the facts or law, was irrelevant, it was neither a breach of the rules of natural justice nor a failure to consider relevant material. If the adjudicators analysis was erroneous, it might follow that he ought to have considered the evidence; the possibility of this type of error, however, was inherent in the adjudication system, and was not a ground for refusing to enforce the adjudicator's decision.
See L145869