Anglian Water Services Ltd v Laing O'Rourke Utilities Ltd [2010] EWHC 1529 (TCC) (25 June 2010)

Anglian Water Services Ltd v Laing O'Rourke Utilities Ltd [2010] EWHC 1529 (TCC) (25 June 2010)

Clause 93.1 is not incompatible with the HGCRA and survives as a valid arbitration clause; service of the notice of dissatisfaction was effective because the defendant's solicitors had been notified as the address for service of communications relevant to the adjudication, and the notice of intention to refer to arbitration was such a communication; actual receipt by relevant individuals does not override the contractual requirements for service; even if service had not been effective, the conduct of the defendant's solicitors did not make it unjust to hold the claimant to the strict contractual time limit, so no extension of time would have been granted.

Citation
[2010] EWHC 1529 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Anglian Water Services Ltd; Defendant: Laing O'Rourke Utilities Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Claim (application for Declaration and Extension of Time) / Judgment After Hearing of Application
Outcome
Claimant succeeds; declaration granted that notice was validly served within time; application for extension of time (if needed) would have been refused.
Legal Topics
Service of Notices Under Contract, Time Limits for Arbitration, Interpretation of Standard Form Contracts, Interaction of Statutory Adjudication and Contractual Arbitration, Extension of Time Under Arbitration Act 1996
Construction Law Arbitration Contract Law Service of Notices Under Contract Time Limits for Arbitration Interpretation of Standard Form Contracts Interaction of Statutory Adjudication and Contractual Arbitration Extension of Time Under Arbitration Act 1996

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anglian Water Services Ltd

Claimant

Laing O'Rourke Utilities Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Claim (application for Declaration and Extension of Time) / Judgment After Hearing of Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is clause 93.1 of the contract incompatible with Part II of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA)?
  2. 2 Was delivery of the notice of dissatisfaction to the defendant's solicitors effective service under the contract?
  3. 3 Does actual receipt by relevant individuals at the defendant company constitute effective service?

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 93.1 is not incompatible with the HGCRA and survives as a valid arbitration clause; service of the notice of dissatisfaction was effective because the defendant's solicitors had been notified as the address for service of communications relevant to the adjudication, and the notice of intention to refer to arbitration was such a communication; actual receipt by relevant individuals does not override the contractual requirements for service; even if service had not been effective, the conduct of the defendant's solicitors did not make it unjust to hold the claimant to the strict contractual time limit, so no extension of time would have been granted.

Court Disposition

Claimant succeeds; declaration granted that notice was validly served within time; application for extension of time (if needed) would have been refused.

Orders

  • Declaration that AWS validly notified its intention to refer the dispute to arbitration within the contractual time limit.
  • Application for extension of time under section 12 of the Arbitration Act 1996 refused (if required).