Was Ellis right on Wallis?
Language: English Series: Building ; 271(8429) 5 May 2006, 57(1)Publication details: 2006Subject(s): Summary: Discusses "Kier Regional Ltd v City and General (Holborn) Ltd" ([2006] EWHC 848, TCC, L133402). This decision makes it clear that not only is irrelevant evidence inadmissible, so is relevant evidence containing new allegations which the other party has not had time to answer. The adjudicator's rejection of expert reports delivered at a late stage in the adjudication did not invalidate his decision; even if he was wrong in doing so, this was an error in law, which did not void his decision.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Journal article | London Journal article | L133406 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 133406-1001 |
Discusses "Kier Regional Ltd v City and General (Holborn) Ltd" ([2006] EWHC 848, TCC, L133402). This decision makes it clear that not only is irrelevant evidence inadmissible, so is relevant evidence containing new allegations which the other party has not had time to answer. The adjudicator's rejection of expert reports delivered at a late stage in the adjudication did not invalidate his decision; even if he was wrong in doing so, this was an error in law, which did not void his decision.