Sleaford Building Services Limited v Isoplus Piping Systems Limited

Sleaford Building Services Limited v Isoplus Piping Systems Limited

The adjudicator’s decision is enforceable and judgment must be entered for Isoplus, as Sleaford’s Part 8 claim is unsuitable for summary determination due to lack of particularisation, unresolved factual issues (including waiver and quantum), and the need for further evidence. There is no defence to enforcement of the adjudicator’s decision on the present material.

Parties
Part 8 Claimant / Part 7 Defendant: Sleaford Building Services Limited; Part 8 Defendant / Part 7 Claimant: Isoplus Piping Systems Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Consolidated Part 7 and Part 8 Proceedings (adjudication Enforcement and Declaratory Relief) / Judgment After Consolidated Hearing of Enforcement and Declaratory Claims
Outcome
Judgment for Isoplus on the Part 7 claim; Sleaford’s Part 8 claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Conditions Precedent to Payment, Waiver, Interpretation of Construction Contracts, HGCRA Compliance
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Enforcement Conditions Precedent to Payment Waiver Interpretation of Construction Contracts HGCRA Compliance

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sleaford Building Services Limited

Part 8 Claimant / Part 7 Defendant

Isoplus Piping Systems Limited

Part 8 Defendant / Part 7 Claimant

Procedural Posture

Consolidated Part 7 and Part 8 Proceedings (adjudication Enforcement and Declaratory Relief) / Judgment After Consolidated Hearing of Enforcement and Declaratory Claims

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 21.4 of the subcontract is a condition precedent to payment and if breached, whether it bars enforcement of the adjudicator’s decision
  2. 2 Whether the Part 8 claim is suitable for summary determination
  3. 3 Whether Sleaford waived any breach of clause 21.4 by making payments with knowledge of non-compliance

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator’s decision is enforceable and judgment must be entered for Isoplus, as Sleaford’s Part 8 claim is unsuitable for summary determination due to lack of particularisation, unresolved factual issues (including waiver and quantum), and the need for further evidence. There is no defence to enforcement of the adjudicator’s decision on the present material.

Court Disposition

Judgment for Isoplus on the Part 7 claim; Sleaford’s Part 8 claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Judgment for Isoplus in the sum of £323,502.32 plus interest.
  • Sleaford’s Part 8 claim dismissed.