Lanes Group Plc v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd (t/a Galliford Try Rail) [2011] EWCA Civ 1617 (21 December 2011)

Lanes Group Plc v Galliford Try Infrastructure Ltd (t/a Galliford Try Rail) [2011] EWCA Civ 1617 (21 December 2011)

Galliford was entitled to commence a second adjudication after the first lapsed, as the right to adjudicate was not lost; Mr Atkinson's preliminary views did not amount to apparent bias as they were clearly expressed as provisional, and the fair-minded observer would not conclude there was a real possibility of bias.

Citation
[2011] EWCA Civ 1617
Parties
Appellant in First Two Appeals, Respondent in Third Appeal: Lanes Group PLC; Respondent in First Two Appeals, Appellant in Third Appeal: Galliford Try Infrastructure Limited T/A Galliford Try Rail
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Conjoined Appeals From the High Court
Outcome
Appeals by Lanes dismissed; Galliford's appeal allowed to the extent indicated; summary judgment for Galliford for sums due under the adjudicator's decision.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Under Construction Contracts, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Apparent Bias, Enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision, Natural Justice
Construction Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Under Construction Contracts Jurisdiction of Adjudicator Apparent Bias Enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision Natural Justice

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lanes Group PLC

Appellant in First Two Appeals, Respondent in Third Appeal

Galliford Try Infrastructure Limited T/A Galliford Try Rail

Respondent in First Two Appeals, Appellant in Third Appeal

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Conjoined Appeals From the High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator (Mr Atkinson) had jurisdiction to determine the dispute after a previous adjudication lapsed
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator's decision was a nullity due to apparent bias

Ratio Decidendi

Galliford was entitled to commence a second adjudication after the first lapsed, as the right to adjudicate was not lost; Mr Atkinson's preliminary views did not amount to apparent bias as they were clearly expressed as provisional, and the fair-minded observer would not conclude there was a real possibility of bias.

Court Disposition

Appeals by Lanes dismissed; Galliford's appeal allowed to the extent indicated; summary judgment for Galliford for sums due under the adjudicator's decision.

Orders

  • Summary judgment for Galliford for the sums due on Mr Atkinson's adjudication decision together with appropriate interest.
  • Counsel to agree figures and submit an agreed form of order.