Domsalla (t/a Domsalla Building Services) v Dyason [2007] EWHC 1174 (TCC) (4 May 2007)

Domsalla (t/a Domsalla Building Services) v Dyason [2007] EWHC 1174 (TCC) (4 May 2007)

The court held that the adjudication clause and withholding notice provisions were valid and binding in this case. The adjudicator had jurisdiction, both under the contract and by ad hoc agreement between the parties. The UTCCR did not render the relevant clauses non-binding on Mr Dyason, as he was acting as agent...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1174 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Steve Domsalla (trading as Domsalla Building Services); Defendant: Kenneth Dyason
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application (cpr 24) for Enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision Under Building Contract / Judgment on Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
summary judgment granted for claimant
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (utccr), Agency, Building Contracts, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Set Off and Withholding Notices
Construction Law Contract Law Consumer Law Adjudication Enforcement Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (utccr) Agency Building Contracts Jurisdiction of Adjudicator +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steve Domsalla (trading as Domsalla Building Services)

Claimant

Kenneth Dyason

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application (cpr 24) for Enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision Under Building Contract / Judgment on Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudication clause and withholding notice provisions in the JCT Minor Works contract are binding on a residential occupier under the UTCCR
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator had jurisdiction to decide the dispute
  3. 3 Whether the adjudicator's decision is enforceable given alleged breaches of natural justice

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the adjudication clause and withholding notice provisions were valid and binding in this case. The adjudicator had jurisdiction, both under the contract and by ad hoc agreement between the parties. The UTCCR did not render the relevant clauses non-binding on Mr Dyason, as he was acting as agent for the insurers and not solely as a consumer. The adjudicator's decision was enforceable, and there was no serious breach of natural justice.

Court Disposition

summary judgment granted for claimant

Orders

  • Enforcement of the adjudicator's decision in favour of Domsalla for £144,040.88 plus adjudicator's fees and expenses of £6,991.25 inclusive of VAT
  • Mr Dyason to pay the sums awarded by the adjudicator