Image from Google Jackets

Payment provisions

By: Series: Contract Journal ; 424(6481) 23 June 2004, 22(1)Publication details: 2004Subject(s): Online resources: Summary: Discusses "Alstom Signalling Ltd v Jarvis Facilities Ltd" ([2004] EWHC 1232 (TCC), [2004] All ER (D) 02 (Jun)), which concerned payment and withholding issues under cost reimburseable contracts. A subcontracted J to supply signalling equipment for a Railtrack project. Under the IChemE Model Form of Conditions of Contract for Process Plants, the subcontract stated J would be paid what the works cost, plus a management fee. When a dispute arose regarding the terms of the contract, J claimed it should be paid the entirity of what was due and the case went to adjudication. J was awarded an interim amount against A, but A appealed when dispute arose over the final amount. The claimant A sought a declaration regarding the terms of the subcontract with J and to recover a contribution to the total loss it claimed to have suffered under the main contract. "Held": J was not entitled to a summary judgment and the adjudicator's decision was set aside. Judgment available to view at www.bailii.org.
Holdings
Item type Current library Call number Copy number Status Barcode
Journal article London Journal article ABS68015 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) 1 Available 126787-1001

Discusses "Alstom Signalling Ltd v Jarvis Facilities Ltd" ([2004] EWHC 1232 (TCC), [2004] All ER (D) 02 (Jun)), which concerned payment and withholding issues under cost reimburseable contracts. A subcontracted J to supply signalling equipment for a Railtrack project. Under the IChemE Model Form of Conditions of Contract for Process Plants, the subcontract stated J would be paid what the works cost, plus a management fee. When a dispute arose regarding the terms of the contract, J claimed it should be paid the entirity of what was due and the case went to adjudication. J was awarded an interim amount against A, but A appealed when dispute arose over the final amount. The claimant A sought a declaration regarding the terms of the subcontract with J and to recover a contribution to the total loss it claimed to have suffered under the main contract. "Held": J was not entitled to a summary judgment and the adjudicator's decision was set aside. Judgment available to view at www.bailii.org.