Placefirst Construction Ltd v Car Construction (North East) Ltd [2025] EWHC 100 (TCC) (24 January 2025)

Placefirst Construction Ltd v Car Construction (North East) Ltd [2025] EWHC 100 (TCC) (24 January 2025)

Placefirst's payless notice served on 31 July 2024 was valid under the Act and subcontract, and Placefirst also served a valid payment notice. The adjudicator's decision requiring payment was wrong and should not be enforced.

Citation
[2025] EWHC 100 (TCC)
Parties
Part 8 Claimant / Part 7 Defendant: Placefirst Construction Limited; Part 8 Defendant / Part 7 Claimant: CAR Construction (North East) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 January 2025
Procedural Posture
Part 7 Enforcement and Part 8 Expedited Determination / Summary Judgment and Final Determination
Outcome
Adjudicator's decision not enforced; Placefirst succeeds.
Legal Topics
Payment Notices, Payless Notices, Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, JCT Design and Build Contract, Adjudication Enforcement
Construction Law Contract Law Payment Notices Payless Notices Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 JCT Design and Build Contract Adjudication Enforcement

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Placefirst Construction Limited

Part 8 Claimant / Part 7 Defendant

CAR Construction (North East) Limited

Part 8 Defendant / Part 7 Claimant

Procedural Posture

Part 7 Enforcement and Part 8 Expedited Determination / Summary Judgment and Final Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Placefirst served a valid payment notice under the Act and subcontract
  2. 2 Whether Placefirst's payless notice was invalid due to timing under the Act and subcontract

Ratio Decidendi

Placefirst's payless notice served on 31 July 2024 was valid under the Act and subcontract, and Placefirst also served a valid payment notice. The adjudicator's decision requiring payment was wrong and should not be enforced.

Court Disposition

Adjudicator's decision not enforced; Placefirst succeeds.

Orders

  • CAR's application for summary judgment dismissed.
  • Placefirst's Part 8 claim succeeds; enforcement of adjudicator's award refused.