Connex South Eastern Ltd v M J Building Services Group Plc

Connex South Eastern Ltd v M J Building Services Group Plc

SE and SC were not joint contractors under the original contract; the agreement of 11 February 2002 only concerned SC works and did not release SE from liability; the phrase 'at any time' in section 108(2) of the Act means what it says and there is no time limit for referring a dispute to adjudication, so MJ's notice was not an abuse of process.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Connex South Eastern Ltd; Defendant/appellant: M J Building Services Group plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Joint and Several Liability, Accord and Satisfaction, Adjudication Under Construction Contracts, Interpretation of Contractual Documents
Contract Law Construction Law Joint and Several Liability Accord and Satisfaction Adjudication Under Construction Contracts Interpretation of Contractual Documents

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Connex South Eastern Ltd

Claimant/respondent

M J Building Services Group plc

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether SE and SC were joint contractors under the original contract
  2. 2 Whether the agreement of 11 February 2002 released SE from liability
  3. 3 Whether MJ's notice of adjudication was an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

SE and SC were not joint contractors under the original contract; the agreement of 11 February 2002 only concerned SC works and did not release SE from liability; the phrase 'at any time' in section 108(2) of the Act means what it says and there is no time limit for referring a dispute to adjudication, so MJ's notice was not an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal allowed on question (3)
  • Cross-appeal dismissed on question (4)