Dawnus Construction Holdings Ltd v Marsh Life Ltd

Dawnus Construction Holdings Ltd v Marsh Life Ltd

By inviting the adjudicator to correct errors under the slip rule without expressly reserving the right to challenge on grounds of natural justice, the defendant elected to treat the decision as valid and is precluded from challenging enforcement. Alternatively, the adjudicator did consider and reject the defendant’s arguments on loss and expense, and any alleged breach of natural justice was not material.

Parties
Claimant: Dawnus Construction Holdings Limited; Defendant: Marsh Life Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil (construction Contract Dispute) / Summary Judgment Application for Enforcement of Adjudication Decision
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for the claimant; adjudicator’s decision enforced.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Natural Justice, Doctrine of Election, Summary Judgment, Loss and Expense Claims, Extension of Time
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Enforcement Natural Justice Doctrine of Election Summary Judgment Loss and Expense Claims +1 more

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dawnus Construction Holdings Limited

Claimant

Marsh Life Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (construction Contract Dispute) / Summary Judgment Application for Enforcement of Adjudication Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant is precluded from challenging enforcement of the adjudicator’s decision due to waiver/election by inviting correction under the slip rule without reserving rights
  2. 2 Whether there was a material breach of natural justice by the adjudicator in failing to consider the defendant’s defences to loss and expense claims

Ratio Decidendi

By inviting the adjudicator to correct errors under the slip rule without expressly reserving the right to challenge on grounds of natural justice, the defendant elected to treat the decision as valid and is precluded from challenging enforcement. Alternatively, the adjudicator did consider and reject the defendant’s arguments on loss and expense, and any alleged breach of natural justice was not material.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for the claimant; adjudicator’s decision enforced.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay claimant £1,038,018.30 plus VAT as directed by the adjudicator.
  • Defendant to pay adjudicator’s fees and expenses of £43,597.00 plus VAT.