Kershaw Mechanical Services Ltd v Kendrick Construction Ltd

Kershaw Mechanical Services Ltd v Kendrick Construction Ltd

The arbitrator correctly interpreted the Qualification clause in the sub-contract. The Qualification does not permit adjustment whenever final design information differs from information supplied by White, Young and Green; rather, entitlement to adjustment depends on whether the item was or should have been included in the tender based on all available information. The arbitrator's approach was reasonable, supported by his specialist experience, and involved no error of law. The appeal is dismissed and the arbitrator's award is confirmed.

Parties
Claimant: Kershaw Mechanical Services Limited; Defendant: Kendrick Construction Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Contract Terms, Variation Claims, Scope of Arbitration Appeals, Deference to Arbitral Findings
Arbitration Construction Law Interpretation of Contract Terms Variation Claims Scope of Arbitration Appeals Deference to Arbitral Findings

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kershaw Mechanical Services Limited

Claimant

Kendrick Construction Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Under Section 69 of the Arbitration Act 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator erred in law in interpreting the 'Qualification' clause in the sub-contract
  2. 2 Whether the Qualification permits adjustment whenever final design information differs from information supplied by White, Young and Green
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's approach to the Qualification was correct in law

Ratio Decidendi

The arbitrator correctly interpreted the Qualification clause in the sub-contract. The Qualification does not permit adjustment whenever final design information differs from information supplied by White, Young and Green; rather, entitlement to adjustment depends on whether the item was or should have been included in the tender based on all available information. The arbitrator's approach was reasonable, supported by his specialist experience, and involved no error of law. The appeal is dismissed and the arbitrator's award is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The arbitrator's partial award is confirmed pursuant to section 69(7)(a) of the Arbitration Act 1996