Hoyle v BAK Building (Contracts) Ltd

Hoyle v BAK Building (Contracts) Ltd

The adjudicator had jurisdiction under the statutory scheme, there was no breach of natural justice or bias, and the defendant's objections were without merit. The claimant is entitled to summary judgment to enforce the adjudicator's decision.

Parties
Claimant: Charles David Hoyle; Defendant: B. A. K. Building (Contracts) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Construction/contract / Application for Summary Judgment to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for the claimant
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Summary Judgment, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, 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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles David Hoyle

Claimant

B. A. K. Building (Contracts) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Construction/contract / Application for Summary Judgment to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator had jurisdiction to decide the dispute
  2. 2 Whether there was a breach of natural justice or bias by the adjudicator
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be granted to enforce the adjudicator's decision

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator had jurisdiction under the statutory scheme, there was no breach of natural justice or bias, and the defendant's objections were without merit. The claimant is entitled to summary judgment to enforce the adjudicator's decision.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for the claimant

Orders

  • Defendant to pay the adjudicated sum of £3,850.96 to the claimant
  • Defendant to pay interest as awarded by the adjudicator