Holloway & Anor v Chancery Mead Ltd [2007] EWHC 2495 (TCC) (30 July 2007)

Holloway & Anor v Chancery Mead Ltd [2007] EWHC 2495 (TCC) (30 July 2007)

Clauses 24.1 and 24.6 of the contract do not impose an enforceable obligation or condition precedent requiring the claimants to refer their disputes with the defendant to the NHBC Resolution Service before commencing arbitration. The disputes in question fall outside the scope of the NHBC Resolution Service, and the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 2495 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Neil Holloway; Claimant: Samantha Holloway; Defendant: Chancery Mead Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2007
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim (cpr) for Declaratory Relief and Directions Under Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Application for Declarations and Directions
Outcome
Declarations granted in favour of the claimants; application under section 18 Arbitration Act 1996 adjourned with liberty to apply.
Legal Topics
Arbitration Agreement Interpretation, Condition Precedent to Arbitration, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Enforceability of ADR Clauses, Jurisdiction of Arbitrator, Appointment of Arbitrator, NHBC Buildmark Scheme
Arbitration Contract Law Construction Law Arbitration Agreement Interpretation Condition Precedent to Arbitration Alternative Dispute Resolution Enforceability of ADR Clauses Jurisdiction of Arbitrator +2 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Neil Holloway

Claimant

Samantha Holloway

Claimant

Chancery Mead Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim (cpr) for Declaratory Relief and Directions Under Arbitration Act 1996 / Judgment on Application for Declarations and Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether clause 24.1 and/or 24.6 of the contract imposed a condition precedent requiring reference to the NHBC Resolution Service before arbitration could be commenced
  2. 2 Whether the claimants were entitled to refer their dispute with the defendant to arbitration immediately
  3. 3 Whether the Notice to Refer served by the claimants was effective and valid

Ratio Decidendi

Clauses 24.1 and 24.6 of the contract do not impose an enforceable obligation or condition precedent requiring the claimants to refer their disputes with the defendant to the NHBC Resolution Service before commencing arbitration. The disputes in question fall outside the scope of the NHBC Resolution Service, and the claimants are entitled to refer them to arbitration immediately. The Notice to Refer was effective and valid.

Court Disposition

Declarations granted in favour of the claimants; application under section 18 Arbitration Act 1996 adjourned with liberty to apply.

Orders

  • Declaration that the claimants are entitled immediately to refer their present disputes with the defendant to arbitration.
  • Declaration that the Notice to Refer served by the claimants on 30 April 2007 was effective and valid.