Adjudication in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 16 November 2005

    It is only too easy in a complex case for a party who is dissatisfied with the decision of an adjudicator to comb through the adjudicator's reasons and identify points upon which to present a challenge under the labels "excess of jurisdiction" or "breach of natural justice". The time constraints within which he is expected to operate are proof of that. The need to have the "right" answer has been subordinated to the need to have an answer quickly.

  • Cantillon Ltd v Urvasco Ltd
    • Queen's Bench Division (Technology and Construction Court)
    • 27 February 2008

    Similarly, the claiming party is not limited to the arguments, contentions and evidence put forward by it before the dispute crystallised. The adjudicator or arbitrator must then resolve the referred dispute, which is essentially the challenged claim or assertion but can consider any argument, evidence or other material for or against the disputed claim or assertion in resolving that dispute.

  • Wimbledon Construction v Vago
    • Queen's Bench Division (Technology and Construction Court)
    • 20 May 2005

    In a number of the authorities which I have cited above the point has been made that each case must turn on its own facts. Whilst I respectfully agree with that, it does seem to me that there are a number of clear principles which should always govern the exercise of the court's discretion when it is considering a stay of execution in adjudication enforcement proceedings. Those principles can be set out as follows:

  • Pegram Shopfitters Ltd v Tally Weijl (UK) Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 21 November 2003

    The fact that adjudication under the Scheme and adjudication under a JCT Prime Cost Contract would be similar procedures does not overcome the twin difficulties that Mr Morris was appointed under the Scheme, and that a sufficiently secure identification of the contractual terms was intrinsically necessary to the proper performance of his adjudication task.

  • Witney Town Council v Beam Construction (Cheltenham) Ltd
    • Queen's Bench Division (Technology and Construction Court)
    • 12 September 2011

    A particular dispute, somewhat like a snowball rolling downhill gathering snow as it goes, may attract more issues and nuances as time goes on; the typical example in a construction contract is the ever increasing dispute about what is due to the contractor as each monthly valuation and certificate is issued; a later certificate may accept amounts in issue previously not certified but then reject some more items of work.

  • Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd
    • Queen's Bench Division (Technology and Construction Court)
    • 26 April 2005

    If an adjudicator declines to consider evidence which, on his analysis of the facts or the law, is irrelevant, that is neither (a) a breach of the rules of natural justice nor (b) a failure to consider relevant material which undermines his decision on Wednesbury grounds or for breach of paragraph 17 of the Scheme. If the adjudicator's analysis of the facts or the law was erroneous, it may follow that he ought to have considered the evidence in question.

  • Rsl (South West) Ltd v Stansell Ltd
    • Queen's Bench Division (Technology and Construction Court)
    • 16 June 2003

    In my judgment the alternative application for an interim payment made in this action, which in substance is a type of application frequently made as an alternative on behalf of beneficiaries of the decision of an adjudicator who are concerned as to the vulnerability of the decision, betrays a misconception as to the juridical nature of the decision of an adjudicator.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results
Forms
  • Chapter STSM022010
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    ......Adjudication of a copy document is not possible STSM022060. This is not the same as a request for an informal opinion of the duty payable. To avoid any confusion ......
  • Chapter STSM154060
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    ...... Stamp Act 1891/S12A(2) provides for a £300 penalty (see STSM154040 - STSM154050) for a failure to stamp an instrument following adjudication (see STSM022010+). The penalty applies where HMRC has issued a formal notice of decision following a request for adjudication but the instrument is ......
  • Chapter STSM012020
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    .... . . Adjudication is the only method of obtaining absolute certainty that a document has been correctly stamped. It may be requested by any person, and once the ......
  • Chapter STSM022050
    • HMRC Guidance manuals
    • Formularios de Derecho Civil, Mercantil y Registral
    .... . . There are two different adjudication stamps currently in use. They are both circular stamps and are impressed on appropriate documents in vermillion ink using the same process as that ......
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT