William Hare Ltd v Shepherd Construction Ltd

William Hare Ltd v Shepherd Construction Ltd

Clause 32.2(a) of the sub-contract only applies if the employer is subject to an administration order under Part II of the Insolvency Act 1986. Trinity's administration was not by court order under Part II but by self-certifying procedure under Schedule B1. The parties entered into the contract after the legislative amendments and chose not to update the clause to reflect the new routes. Therefore, the withholding notices are invalid and Hare is entitled to payment.

Parties
Claimant: William Hare Limited; Defendant: Shepherd Construction Limited; Claimant: CR Reynolds
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil (construction Contract Dispute) / Judgment on Part 8 Claim
Outcome
Claim allowed for Hare; declarations granted; Shepherd's withholding notices invalid.
Legal Topics
Pay When Paid Clauses, Statutory Interpretation, Contractual Construction, Insolvency Events, Contra Proferentem
Construction Law Contract Law Insolvency Law Pay When Paid Clauses Statutory Interpretation Contractual Construction Insolvency Events Contra Proferentem

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

Parties

William Hare Limited

Claimant

Shepherd Construction Limited

Defendant

CR Reynolds

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil (construction Contract Dispute) / Judgment on Part 8 Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pay when paid clause in the sub-contract is triggered by the employer's insolvency under the amended Insolvency Act 1986 routes to administration
  2. 2 Whether the withholding notices issued by Shepherd are valid given the method of Trinity's administration

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 32.2(a) of the sub-contract only applies if the employer is subject to an administration order under Part II of the Insolvency Act 1986. Trinity's administration was not by court order under Part II but by self-certifying procedure under Schedule B1. The parties entered into the contract after the legislative amendments and chose not to update the clause to reflect the new routes. Therefore, the withholding notices are invalid and Hare is entitled to payment.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed for Hare; declarations granted; Shepherd's withholding notices invalid.

Orders

  • Declarations granted as per paragraph 26 of the particulars of claim.
  • Judgment for Hare for £569,601.75 plus VAT (Valuation 5) and £427,081.60 plus VAT (Valuation 6).