Lapp Industries Ltd v 1st Formations Ltd [2025] EWHC 943 (TCC) (16 April 2025)

Lapp Industries Ltd v 1st Formations Ltd [2025] EWHC 943 (TCC) (16 April 2025)

The adjudicator had jurisdiction because there was a single construction contract, not multiple contracts, and the issue of contract number was within her jurisdiction to decide. There was no breach of natural justice: the adjudicator did not go off on a frolic of her own, and she considered all material defences. The decision is enforceable by summary judgment as there is no real prospect of the defendant succeeding at trial.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 943 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: LAPP Industries Ltd; Defendant: 1st Formations Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application (enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision) / Judgment on Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for the claimant.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Natural Justice in Adjudication, Summary Judgment, Construction Contracts
Construction Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Enforcement Jurisdiction of Adjudicator Natural Justice in Adjudication Summary Judgment Construction Contracts

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LAPP Industries Ltd

Claimant

1st Formations Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application (enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision) / Judgment on Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator had jurisdiction to decide the dispute (single contract vs multiple contracts)
  2. 2 Whether there was a breach of natural justice by the adjudicator (frolic of her own, failure to consider defences)
  3. 3 Whether the adjudicator's decision should be enforced by summary judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator had jurisdiction because there was a single construction contract, not multiple contracts, and the issue of contract number was within her jurisdiction to decide. There was no breach of natural justice: the adjudicator did not go off on a frolic of her own, and she considered all material defences. The decision is enforceable by summary judgment as there is no real prospect of the defendant succeeding at trial.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for the claimant.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay the sum awarded in the adjudicator's decision (£120,000 plus interest)
  • Defendant to pay the adjudicator's fees