Image from Google Jackets

David and Teresa Bothma T/A DAB Builders v Mayhaven Healthcare Ltd [electronic resource]

Language: English Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2007] EWCA Civ 527, 14 May 2007. Considered whether more than one dispute may be referred to adjudication. The claimant contractor (B) applied for leave of appeal to enforce an adjudicator's decision that determined disputes arising out of a JCT IFC 98 form of contract. The Scheme for Construction Contracts was the applicable adjudication procedure. B gave notice of adjudication, identifying four disputes, and the adjudicator directed the defendant company (M) to make two payments to B. M refused, asserting that two distinct disputes had been referred to and by deciding both the adjudicator was not within his jurisdiction. B's claim for summary judgment was refused and B applied for leave of appeal. "Held": application refused. The amount payable under valuation nine was unconnected with the three other matters in the notice of adjudication and therefore there were two disputes, which meant the adjudicator had no jurisdiction.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Law report Virtual Online ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 139846-2001

[2007] EWCA Civ 527, 14 May 2007. Considered whether more than one dispute may be referred to adjudication. The claimant contractor (B) applied for leave of appeal to enforce an adjudicator's decision that determined disputes arising out of a JCT IFC 98 form of contract. The Scheme for Construction Contracts was the applicable adjudication procedure. B gave notice of adjudication, identifying four disputes, and the adjudicator directed the defendant company (M) to make two payments to B. M refused, asserting that two distinct disputes had been referred to and by deciding both the adjudicator was not within his jurisdiction. B's claim for summary judgment was refused and B applied for leave of appeal. "Held": application refused. The amount payable under valuation nine was unconnected with the three other matters in the notice of adjudication and therefore there were two disputes, which meant the adjudicator had no jurisdiction.