Birmingham City Council v Paddison Construction Ltd [2008] EWHC 2254 (TCC) (25 September 2008)

Birmingham City Council v Paddison Construction Ltd [2008] EWHC 2254 (TCC) (25 September 2008)

The first adjudicator, Mr Bullock, made a binding decision on Paddison's loss and/or expense claim, refusing any further payment beyond what was certified. The dispute referred to the second adjudicator, Mr Jensen, is the same or substantially the same as that previously decided. Therefore, Mr Jensen has no jurisdiction to act as adjudicator in the second adjudication.

Citation
[2008] EWHC 2254 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Birmingham City Council; Defendant: Paddison Construction Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Proceedings (declaratory Relief) / Judgment After Hearing
Outcome
Declarations granted in favour of BCC; second adjudicator has no jurisdiction.
Legal Topics
Adjudication, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Res Judicata in Adjudication, Loss and Expense Claims, Extension of Time
Construction Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Jurisdiction of Adjudicator Res Judicata in Adjudication Loss and Expense Claims Extension of Time

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Birmingham City Council

Claimant

Paddison Construction Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Proceedings (declaratory Relief) / Judgment After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the first adjudicator (Mr Bullock) make a binding decision on Paddison's loss and/or expense claim?
  2. 2 Is the dispute referred to the second adjudicator (Mr Jensen) the same or substantially the same as that referred to the first adjudicator?
  3. 3 Does the second adjudicator have jurisdiction to act?

Ratio Decidendi

The first adjudicator, Mr Bullock, made a binding decision on Paddison's loss and/or expense claim, refusing any further payment beyond what was certified. The dispute referred to the second adjudicator, Mr Jensen, is the same or substantially the same as that previously decided. Therefore, Mr Jensen has no jurisdiction to act as adjudicator in the second adjudication.

Court Disposition

Declarations granted in favour of BCC; second adjudicator has no jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Declaration that the dispute referred to Mr Jensen is the same or substantially the same as that referred to Mr Bullock.
  • Declaration that Mr Bullock made a binding decision on the dispute.