Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2012] All ER (D) 16 (Jun)
Neutral Citation: [2012] EWHC 1509 (TCC)
Court: Queen's Bench Division, Technology and Construction Court
Judge:

Edwards-Stuart J
Representation Gaynor Chambers (instructed by Birketts LLP) for the employer. 
  Sarah Hannaford QC (instructed by Birketts LLP) for the contractor. 
Judgment Dates: 1 June 2012

Catchwords

Building contract - Practice - Adjudication - Jurisdiction - Claimant being employer under building contract - Claimant entering into trade contract with defendant contractor for development in London - Contractor claiming higher sum than originally agreed based primarily on variations - Matter going to adjudication] - Employer seeking court's intervention - Employer seeking declaration on interpretation of clause in trade contract - Whether court having jurisdiction to intervene - Whether declaration to be granted.

The Case

Building contract Practice. The Technology and Construction Court gave consideration to circumstances in which it would be appropriate to grant a declaration under CPR 8 where there was an ongoing adjudication concerning a dispute in respect of claims made by a contractor under a building contract for payment based mainly on variations.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.

Lexis®Library

  • An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
  • Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
  • The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
  • Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases