header-logo header-logo

22 November 2013
Issue: 7585 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Adjudication

Roe Brickwork Ltd v Wates Construction Ltd [2013] EWHC 3417 (TCC), [2013] All ER (D) 105 (Nov)

It was established law that the court would not interfere with the decision of an adjudicator who had answered the question referred to him even though the court took the view that the answer was wrong or that the adjudicator had made an obvious mistake. If an adjudicator had it in mind to determine a point wholly or partly on the basis of material that had not been put before him by the parties, he had to give them an opportunity to make submissions on it.  By contrast, there was no rule that a judge, arbitrator or adjudicator had to decide a case only by accepting the submissions of one party or another. An adjudicator could reach a decision on a point of importance on the material before him on a basis for which neither party had contended, provided that the parties were aware of the relevant material and that the issues to which it gave rise had been fairly canvassed before the adjudicator. 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll