Victory House General Partner Ltd v RGB P&C Ltd [2018] EWHC 102 (TCC) (26 January 2018)

Victory House General Partner Ltd v RGB P&C Ltd [2018] EWHC 102 (TCC) (26 January 2018)

The adjudicator did not breach natural justice as both parties had opportunity to address the operative effect of Recital D in the Memorandum of Understanding; RGB's response formed the basis for the adjudicator's analysis and VH could have sought permission to respond but did not. The adjudicator was entitled to reach a conclusion not strictly reflecting either party's submissions.

Citation
[2018] EWHC 102 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Victory House General Partner Limited; Defendant: RGB P&C Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim and Summary Judgment Application / Summary Judgment Enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision
Outcome
Summary judgment granted in favour of RGB P&C Limited enforcing adjudicator's decision.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Natural Justice, Contractual Interpretation, Memorandum of Understanding, Payment Provisions
Construction Law Contract Law Adjudication Enforcement Natural Justice Contractual Interpretation Memorandum of Understanding Payment Provisions

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

Parties

Victory House General Partner Limited

Claimant

RGB P&C Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim and Summary Judgment Application / Summary Judgment Enforcement of Adjudicator's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator's decision was invalid for breach of natural justice
  2. 2 Whether the Memorandum of Understanding superseded the payment provisions of the contract
  3. 3 Whether RGB was entitled to payment under Application 30

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator did not breach natural justice as both parties had opportunity to address the operative effect of Recital D in the Memorandum of Understanding; RGB's response formed the basis for the adjudicator's analysis and VH could have sought permission to respond but did not. The adjudicator was entitled to reach a conclusion not strictly reflecting either party's submissions.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted in favour of RGB P&C Limited enforcing adjudicator's decision.

Orders

  • VH to pay RGB £682,802.88 plus VAT together with interest until payment.
  • Costs and directions for conversion of Part 8 proceedings to Part 7 to be dealt with at formal handing down if not agreed.