Merit Process Engineering Ltd v Balfour Beatty Engineering Services (HY) Ltd

Merit Process Engineering Ltd v Balfour Beatty Engineering Services (HY) Ltd

No binding sub-contract including an arbitration clause was concluded for the Main Installation package as the parties had not agreed on the contract price by 9 May 2005; thus, the proceedings for that package are not stayed. For the Vacuum Drainage and Isis packages, binding sub-contracts including arbitration clauses were concluded, so proceedings for those packages are stayed under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Parties
Claimant: Merit Process Engineering Ltd; Defendant: Balfour Beatty Engineering Services (HY) Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial Construction) / Interlocutory Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Arbitration
Outcome
Application for stay granted in part, refused in part
Legal Topics
Formation of Contract, Letters of Intent, Arbitration Clauses, Stay of Proceedings
Contract Law Arbitration Formation of Contract Letters of Intent Arbitration Clauses Stay of Proceedings

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

Parties

Merit Process Engineering Ltd

Claimant

Balfour Beatty Engineering Services (HY) Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial Construction) / Interlocutory Application for Stay of Proceedings Pending Arbitration

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a binding sub-contract including an arbitration clause was concluded for the Main Installation package
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings relating to the Main Installation, Vacuum Drainage, and Isis packages should be stayed under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

No binding sub-contract including an arbitration clause was concluded for the Main Installation package as the parties had not agreed on the contract price by 9 May 2005; thus, the proceedings for that package are not stayed. For the Vacuum Drainage and Isis packages, binding sub-contracts including arbitration clauses were concluded, so proceedings for those packages are stayed under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

Court Disposition

Application for stay granted in part, refused in part

Orders

  • Proceedings relating to the Main Installation package are not stayed.
  • Proceedings relating to the Vacuum Drainage and Isis packages are stayed under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996.