YCMS Ltd (t/a Young Construction Management Services) v Grabiner & Anor [2009] EWHC 127 (TCC) (31 January 2009)

YCMS Ltd (t/a Young Construction Management Services) v Grabiner & Anor [2009] EWHC 127 (TCC) (31 January 2009)

The adjudicator did not exceed his jurisdiction by considering Certificate No. 14, as the defendants themselves raised it as a defence; however, the revision of the decision was not a valid slip correction as it involved second thoughts rather than correcting a genuine arithmetical error. The first adjudication award is enforceable, there is no proven duplication with the second award, and set-off against the third adjudication is not permitted. VAT is only recoverable to the extent awarded by the adjudicator.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 127 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: YCMS Limited (trading as Young Construction Management Services); Defendant: Stephen Grabiner; Defendant: Miriam Grabiner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision / Judgment on Application for Summary Judgment
Outcome
Summary judgment for the claimant (YCMS) for the sum of £28,675.44 (inclusive of VAT)
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Jurisdiction of Adjudicator, Slip Rule in Adjudication, Set Off Between Adjudication Awards, VAT on Construction Payments
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Enforcement Jurisdiction of Adjudicator Slip Rule in Adjudication Set Off Between Adjudication Awards VAT on Construction Payments

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

Parties

YCMS Limited (trading as Young Construction Management Services)

Claimant

Stephen Grabiner

Defendant

Miriam Grabiner

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision / Judgment on Application for Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator exceeded his jurisdiction by including sums under Certificate No. 14 in the award
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator's revision of his decision was valid under the slip rule
  3. 3 Whether the first and second adjudication awards duplicated each other

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator did not exceed his jurisdiction by considering Certificate No. 14, as the defendants themselves raised it as a defence; however, the revision of the decision was not a valid slip correction as it involved second thoughts rather than correcting a genuine arithmetical error. The first adjudication award is enforceable, there is no proven duplication with the second award, and set-off against the third adjudication is not permitted. VAT is only recoverable to the extent awarded by the adjudicator.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment for the claimant (YCMS) for the sum of £28,675.44 (inclusive of VAT)

Orders

  • Defendants to pay YCMS £28,675.44 within the time directed
  • Court to hear parties on interest and costs