Twintec Ltd v Volkerfitzpatrick Ltd

Twintec Ltd v Volkerfitzpatrick Ltd

The adjudicator was not validly appointed under any contractual provision between Twintec and VFL, as the DOM/2 terms were not incorporated into the letter of intent and Twintec did not agree to the identity of the nominating body. Therefore, the adjudication cannot proceed and an injunction is justified.

Parties
Applicant: Twintec Ltd; Respondent: Volkerfitzpatrick Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Application / Judgment
Outcome
Injunction granted restraining further pursuit of the adjudication.
Legal Topics
Adjudication, Jurisdiction, Letters of Intent, Contractual Terms, Injunctions
Construction Law Contract Law Adjudication Jurisdiction Letters of Intent Contractual Terms Injunctions

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Twintec Ltd

Applicant

Volkerfitzpatrick Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator was validly appointed under a contractual provision
  2. 2 Whether the terms of the DOM/2 standard form were incorporated into the letter of intent
  3. 3 Whether the referral to adjudication was oppressive or unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator was not validly appointed under any contractual provision between Twintec and VFL, as the DOM/2 terms were not incorporated into the letter of intent and Twintec did not agree to the identity of the nominating body. Therefore, the adjudication cannot proceed and an injunction is justified.

Court Disposition

Injunction granted restraining further pursuit of the adjudication.

Orders

  • VFL restrained from pursuing the adjudication any further.
  • Precise terms of the order to be agreed by counsel.