Thomas-Fredric's (Construction) Ltd v Wilson [2003] EWCA Civ 1494 (21 October 2003)

Thomas-Fredric's (Construction) Ltd v Wilson [2003] EWCA Civ 1494 (21 October 2003)

The appellant did not submit to the adjudicator's jurisdiction in the full sense, and the adjudicator's ruling on jurisdiction was not plainly right; therefore, summary judgment enforcing the award should not have been granted.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Civ 1494
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Thomas-Fredric's (Construction) Limited; Defendant/appellant: Keith Wilson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment Enforcing Adjudicator's Award
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Jurisdictional Challenge, Summary Judgment, Construction Contracts, Binding Effect of Adjudicator's Decision
Construction Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Enforcement Jurisdictional Challenge Summary Judgment Construction Contracts Binding Effect of Adjudicator's Decision

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas-Fredric's (Construction) Limited

Claimant/respondent

Keith Wilson

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Summary Judgment Enforcing Adjudicator's Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator had jurisdiction to make the award under the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996
  2. 2 Whether the contract was with Mr Wilson personally or with Gowersand Ltd
  3. 3 Whether the appellant submitted to the adjudicator's jurisdiction so as to be bound by his decision

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not submit to the adjudicator's jurisdiction in the full sense, and the adjudicator's ruling on jurisdiction was not plainly right; therefore, summary judgment enforcing the award should not have been granted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order below set aside
  • Respondent's application for summary judgment dismissed