Westfields Construction Ltd v Lewis [2013] EWHC 376 (TCC) (27 February 2013)

Westfields Construction Ltd v Lewis [2013] EWHC 376 (TCC) (27 February 2013)

The defendant did not occupy the property as his residence at the time of contract nor intend to do so; his intention was to let the property commercially. Therefore, the s.106 exception did not apply, the adjudicator had jurisdiction, and the claimant was entitled to enforce the adjudicator's decision.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 376 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Westfields Construction Limited; Defendant: Clive Lewis
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision (construction Dispute) / High Court (tcc) Judgment on Summary Enforcement Application
Outcome
Claim allowed; summary judgment granted for enforcement of adjudicator's decision.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Residential Occupier Exception, Section 106 Housing Grants (construction and Regeneration) Act 1996, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator
Construction Law Contract Law Adjudication Enforcement Residential Occupier Exception Section 106 Housing Grants (construction and Regeneration) Act 1996 Jurisdiction of Adjudicator

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Westfields Construction Limited

Claimant

Clive Lewis

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision (construction Dispute) / High Court (tcc) Judgment on Summary Enforcement Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant was a 'residential occupier' under s.106 of the Housing Grants (Construction and Regeneration) Act 1996, thereby excluding statutory adjudication provisions
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator had jurisdiction to determine the dispute

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant did not occupy the property as his residence at the time of contract nor intend to do so; his intention was to let the property commercially. Therefore, the s.106 exception did not apply, the adjudicator had jurisdiction, and the claimant was entitled to enforce the adjudicator's decision.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; summary judgment granted for enforcement of adjudicator's decision.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant £17,393.91 plus interest as determined by the adjudicator.