Transport for Greater Manchester v Kier Construction Ltd (T/a Kier Construction - Northern)

Transport for Greater Manchester v Kier Construction Ltd (T/a Kier Construction - Northern)

TfGM gave a valid notice of dissatisfaction by sending a clear and unambiguous letter to Kier’s solicitors, the last notified address for communications in the adjudication, within the required time. This preserved TfGM’s right to challenge the adjudicator’s decision and prevented it from becoming final and binding. The contractual requirements for service were satisfied by the parties’ conduct and agreement on communication methods during the adjudication.

Parties
Claimant: Transport for Greater Manchester; Defendant: Kier Construction Limited (t/a Kier Construction - Northern)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Civil (construction Contract Dispute) / Application to Set Aside Claim for Lack of Jurisdiction
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Adjudication Under NEC Contract, Notice of Dissatisfaction, Jurisdiction of Court, Service of Communications
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Under NEC Contract Notice of Dissatisfaction Jurisdiction of Court Service of Communications

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

Parties

Transport for Greater Manchester

Claimant

Kier Construction Limited (t/a Kier Construction - Northern)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (construction Contract Dispute) / Application to Set Aside Claim for Lack of Jurisdiction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether TfGM gave a valid notice of dissatisfaction under the contract to preserve its right to challenge the adjudicator’s decision
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator’s decision became final and binding due to alleged non-compliance with contractual notice provisions

Ratio Decidendi

TfGM gave a valid notice of dissatisfaction by sending a clear and unambiguous letter to Kier’s solicitors, the last notified address for communications in the adjudication, within the required time. This preserved TfGM’s right to challenge the adjudicator’s decision and prevented it from becoming final and binding. The contractual requirements for service were satisfied by the parties’ conduct and agreement on communication methods during the adjudication.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Kier’s application under CPR Part 11 is dismissed
  • All consequential or other matters to be dealt with at a further hearing if not agreed