Walter Llewellyn & Sons Ltd & Anor v Excel Brickwork Ltd [2010] EWHC 3415 (TCC) (22 December 2010)

Walter Llewellyn & Sons Ltd & Anor v Excel Brickwork Ltd [2010] EWHC 3415 (TCC) (22 December 2010)

There was no express or implied agreement to arbitrate in the Sub-Contract because the relevant contractual documents did not select arbitration as the dispute resolution forum. The Additions clause was conditional on the standard form making provision for arbitration, which it did not unless expressly selected. Therefore, no arbitration agreement existed and the application for a stay failed.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 3415 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Walter Llewellyn & Sons Limited; Claimant: Rok Building Limited; Defendant: Excel Brickwork Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Application for Stay of Proceedings / Hearing and Judgment on Application for Stay Under Section 9 Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome
Application for stay refused
Legal Topics
Arbitration Agreements, Interpretation of Contracts, Adjudication Under HGCRA, Stay of Proceedings
Construction Law Contract Law Arbitration Arbitration Agreements Interpretation of Contracts Adjudication Under HGCRA 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Walter Llewellyn & Sons Limited

Claimant

Rok Building Limited

Claimant

Excel Brickwork Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Stay of Proceedings / Hearing and Judgment on Application for Stay Under Section 9 Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sub-Contract contains an arbitration agreement within the meaning of Section 9 Arbitration Act 1996
  2. 2 Interpretation of dispute resolution provisions in the Sub-Contract

Ratio Decidendi

There was no express or implied agreement to arbitrate in the Sub-Contract because the relevant contractual documents did not select arbitration as the dispute resolution forum. The Additions clause was conditional on the standard form making provision for arbitration, which it did not unless expressly selected. Therefore, no arbitration agreement existed and the application for a stay failed.

Court Disposition

Application for stay refused

Orders

  • Defendant's application for stay of proceedings is dismissed
  • Defendant to pay Claimant's costs of the application