000			01990cam a2200217 4500
001			ABS62731
008			000000n2000 000 0 eng u
035			_a(Sirsi) u108023
245			_aLafarge Redland Aggregates Ltd v Shephard Hill Civil Engineering Ltd
260			_c2000
490			_aWeekly Law Reports _v[2000] 1WLR 1621-1643(12)
520			_aHL 27 July 2000. Employer, a local authority, engaged the contractor, S, to construct a bypass under a contract incorporating an amended form of the ICE Standard Form of Contract, 5th edition. Clause 66 of the contract allowed for any disputes to be settled by the engineer. S then engaged a subcontractor to supply the surfacing for the carriageway under a contract incorporating, with amendments, the FCEC Standard Form of Subcontract. Clause 18 of this contract provided for any dispute under the subcontract to be referred to arbitration. However, Clause 18(2) allowed the contractor to serve notice on the subcontractor requiring the dispute to be to be dealt with jointly under the main contract. Disputes arose under both contracts. L gave notice of its intention to to refer its dispute to arbitration. S announced it was entitled to proceed by negotiation with the employer. S failed to engage the engineer and L sought a a declaration that S had waived its right to rely on Clause 18(2). Judge dismissed summons. CA allowed L's appeal. HL dismissed contractor's appeal. (Full judgement available on http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld/ldjudinf.htm
590			_aABS
650			_aLAFARGE REDLAND AGGREGATES LTD V SHEPHARD HILL CIVIL ENGINEERING LTD
650			_aMANAGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-ARBITRATION
650			_aDISPUTE RESOLUTION _96236
650			_aICE FORM OF CONTRACT
650			_aFCEC FORM OF SUBCONTRACT
690			_aMANGEMENT-DISPUTE AVOIDANCE, MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION-DISPUTE MANAGEMENT AND RESOLUTION
942			_n0
999			_c64538 _d64538