DGT Steel and Cladding Ltd v Cubitt Building and Interiors Ltd [electronic resource]
Language: English Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2007] EWHC 1584 (TCC), 4 July 2007. Considered whether a temporary stay of court proceedings should be granted pending adjudication of the underlying dispute. Defendant contractor (C) engaged claimant (D) as subcontractor to carry out external cladding works at a project in east London. The subcontract contained an adjudication provision. Disputes arose and D referred a claim to adjudication, based upon the alleged failure by C to operate the contractual mechanism for payment. C defended the claim, and the adjudicator found in C's favour. D commenced proceedings, and C applied to stop the litigation, arguing that the underlying dispute should first be the subject of adjudication. "Held": judgment for C and order made to stay the proceedings. It was found that the subcontract contained a binding adjudication agreement and therefore D was not entitled to commence court proceedings in breach of that provision.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | Virtual Online | ONLINE PUBLICATION (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 139848-2001 |
Browsing Virtual shelves, Shelving location: Online Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
[2007] EWHC 1584 (TCC), 4 July 2007. Considered whether a temporary stay of court proceedings should be granted pending adjudication of the underlying dispute. Defendant contractor (C) engaged claimant (D) as subcontractor to carry out external cladding works at a project in east London. The subcontract contained an adjudication provision. Disputes arose and D referred a claim to adjudication, based upon the alleged failure by C to operate the contractual mechanism for payment. C defended the claim, and the adjudicator found in C's favour. D commenced proceedings, and C applied to stop the litigation, arguing that the underlying dispute should first be the subject of adjudication. "Held": judgment for C and order made to stay the proceedings. It was found that the subcontract contained a binding adjudication agreement and therefore D was not entitled to commence court proceedings in breach of that provision.