| 000 | 01077cab a22002055a 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | L154040 | ||
| 008 | 111007e20110413xxk 000 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u154040 | ||
| 041 | 0 | _aeng | |
| 245 | 0 | 0 |
_aJerram Falkus Construction Ltd v Fenice Investments Inc _h[electronic resource] |
| 260 | _c2011 | ||
| 520 | _a[2011] EWHC 1935 (TCC), 21 July 2011. For the reasons given in Section 5, it is not open to JFC to challenge the decision in the third adjudication. They are therefore not entitled to make any further delay-related claim. It would also mean that Fenice is entitled to liquidated damages as set out. The other two conclusively arguments, one raised by each side, must fail. | ||
| 590 | _aKA | ||
| 650 | 2 | 4 | _aFENICE V ERRAM FALKUS |
| 651 | 4 |
_aEngland and Wales _y1543- |
|
| 690 | _aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION | ||
| 690 | _aBUILT ENVIRONMENT-BUILDING CONTRACT FORMS | ||
| 856 | 4 | 0 |
_uhttps://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2011/1935.html _zView the judgement free of charge at www.bailii.org |
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c83467 _d83467 |
||