Image from Google Jackets

AC Yule and Son Ltd v Speedwell Roofing and Cladding Ltd [electronic resource]

Language: English Publication details: 2007Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: [2007] EWHC 1360 (TCC), 31 May 2007. Considers the enforcement of an adjudicator's decision apparently issued late and estoppel by silence. Claimant (Y) commenced adjudication proceedings against defendant (S) in accordance with the Scheme for Construction Contracts. The adjudicator sought more time and Y agreed to a 14 day extension, bringing the decision date to 3 April 2007. The adjudicator's decision was made on 4 April and S refused to pay Y, arguing the decision was after the agreed extended period and a nullity. "Held": the judge rejected S?s argument and enforced the adjudicator?s decision. S?s silence and conduct during the week before the decision was due had been consistent with it having agreed to an extension to 5 April (as requested by the adjudicator and agreed to by Y). Therefore the judge agreed that there had been an estoppel by silence.

[2007] EWHC 1360 (TCC), 31 May 2007. Considers the enforcement of an adjudicator's decision apparently issued late and estoppel by silence. Claimant (Y) commenced adjudication proceedings against defendant (S) in accordance with the Scheme for Construction Contracts. The adjudicator sought more time and Y agreed to a 14 day extension, bringing the decision date to 3 April 2007. The adjudicator's decision was made on 4 April and S refused to pay Y, arguing the decision was after the agreed extended period and a nullity. "Held": the judge rejected S?s argument and enforced the adjudicator?s decision. S?s silence and conduct during the week before the decision was due had been consistent with it having agreed to an extension to 5 April (as requested by the adjudicator and agreed to by Y). Therefore the judge agreed that there had been an estoppel by silence.