The Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act, 2009 ("LDEDCA") says that if a valid Default Payment Notice is submitted by a Payee which is not rebutted by a valid and timeous Payment Notice or Pay Less Notice by the Payer, then the Payer is required to pay to the Payee the ‘notified sum’ as stated on the Default Payment Notice. This sets out the principle of ‘pay now – argue later’, a principle designed to protect the Payee’s cash flow.
|
An issue that sometimes arises is, can a Referring Party unilaterally withdraw from an Adjudication?
In a previous Newsletter we considered the position regarding the recovery by a party of its costs in the adjudication process. The ‘Construction Act’ of 1996, was silent on the question of costs. However, the presumption was always that (irrespective of the outcome of the adjudication) parties would be liable for their own costs in the adjudication process.
In 2017 the University of Westminster is promoting the Construction Law Seminar Series II: Comparing International Construction Disputes, for the engagement of students, international players and stakeholders in the construction industry, encouraging a horizontal debate environment for the future construction law professionals.
Peter Barnes, Blue Sky ADR Ltd
The use and abuse of Part 8 Applications in attempting to resist the enforcement of Adjudicator’s Decisions was considered and decided upon by Mr Justice Coulson in the recent Hutton Construction Limited v Wilson Properties (London) Limited [2017] EWHC 517 (TCC) case. A number of our clients have asked us if we provide Employment Law Services, and we have had to advise them that we do not provide those services.
Introduction
In Adjudication the normal position (under both the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, and the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009, (the Construction Acts)) is that both parties are responsible for their own costs in the adjudication process irrespective of whether they ‘win, lose or draw’ the Adjudication. There can be exceptions to this normal position but those exceptions are rarely encountered, and therefore are ignored entirely for the purpose of this article. The basic premise being taken in this article (a basic premise that applies in the overwhelming majority of cases in any event) is that parties to an Adjudication are liable for their own costs irrespective of the outcome of the Adjudication. JCT has now published the 2016 edition of the Design and Build Contract. There have been many changes to the wording of the contracts. This is our second Newsletter looking at the key changes that have been made, our previous Newsletter was issued earlier this month.
JCT has now published the 2016 edition of the Design and Build Contract. There have been many changes to the wording of the contracts but in this and in our next Newsletter we will be looking at the key changes that have been made.
|
RSS Feed