Aecom Design Build Ltd v Staptina Engineering Services Ltd

Aecom Design Build Ltd v Staptina Engineering Services Ltd

The adjudicator had jurisdiction to determine both the principle and method of deductions for defects, as these were encompassed within the dispute referred and the parties' submissions. There was no material breach of natural justice, as the relevant issues and materials were fully canvassed before the adjudicator.

Parties
Claimant: AECOM Design Build Limited; Defendant: Staptina Engineering Services Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Part 8 Claim / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Adjudication, Jurisdiction, Natural Justice, Contractual Interpretation, Termination of Contract, Defects Liability
Construction Law Contract Law Adjudication Jurisdiction Natural Justice Contractual Interpretation Termination of Contract Defects Liability

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

Parties

AECOM Design Build Limited

Claimant

Staptina Engineering Services Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 8 Claim / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator had jurisdiction to determine the principle and method of deductions for defects following termination under Reason 5
  2. 2 Whether there was a breach of natural justice in the adjudicator's decision regarding the method of deduction

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator had jurisdiction to determine both the principle and method of deductions for defects, as these were encompassed within the dispute referred and the parties' submissions. There was no material breach of natural justice, as the relevant issues and materials were fully canvassed before the adjudicator.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed