Midland Expressway Ltd v Carillion Construction Ltd & Ors (No. 2) [2005] EWHC 2963 (TCC) (24 November 2005)

Midland Expressway Ltd v Carillion Construction Ltd & Ors (No. 2) [2005] EWHC 2963 (TCC) (24 November 2005)

There is a construction dispute between CAMBBA and MEL within the meaning of the D&C contract and the 1996 Act. Clauses in the contract purporting to delay or prevent adjudication or interim payment until the concession agreement process is complete or MEL has been paid are contrary to sections 108 and 113 of the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 2963 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Midland Expressway Limited; Defendant: Carillion Construction Limited; Defendant: Alfred McAlpine Construction Limited; Defendant: Balfour Beatty Group Limited; Defendant: AMEC Capital Projects Limited; Defendant: John E Price
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Claim for Declarations and Injunctions (part 8 Cpr) / Judgment After Expedited Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Adjudication Under Construction Contracts, Pay When Paid Clauses, Interim Payments, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Interpretation of Contract Terms, Application of Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Under Construction Contracts Pay When Paid Clauses Interim Payments Jurisdiction of Adjudicator Interpretation of Contract Terms +1 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Midland Expressway Limited

Claimant

Carillion Construction Limited

Defendant

Alfred McAlpine Construction Limited

Defendant

Balfour Beatty Group Limited

Defendant

AMEC Capital Projects Limited

Defendant

John E Price

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Claim for Declarations and Injunctions (part 8 Cpr) / Judgment After Expedited Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a construction dispute between CAMBBA and MEL within the contract and the 1996 Act
  2. 2 Whether clause 7 of the D&C contract prevents CAMBBA from pursuing adjudication at this time
  3. 3 Whether CAMBBA are entitled to press for interim payment before the concession agreement dispute resolution is complete

Ratio Decidendi

There is a construction dispute between CAMBBA and MEL within the meaning of the D&C contract and the 1996 Act. Clauses in the contract purporting to delay or prevent adjudication or interim payment until the concession agreement process is complete or MEL has been paid are contrary to sections 108 and 113 of the 1996 Act and are ineffective. CAMBBA is entitled to proceed to adjudication and to claim interim payment; MEL is not entitled to the declaratory or injunctive relief sought.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Declarations and injunctions sought by MEL refused
  • CAMBBA entitled to proceed with adjudication against MEL