Ellis Building Contractors Ltd v Goldstein [2011] EWHC 269 (TCC) (18 February 2011)

Ellis Building Contractors Ltd v Goldstein [2011] EWHC 269 (TCC) (18 February 2011)

The adjudicator's decision was enforceable because the issue of the signed contract documents was properly before him, and the deployment of 'without prejudice' material did not give rise to a legitimate fear of bias. The Second Letter of Intent did not impose a binding financial cap in the absence of its incorporation into the contract documents.

Citation
[2011] EWHC 269 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Ellis Building Contractors Limited; Defendant: Vincent Goldstein
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision / Judgment
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for the claimant; adjudicator's decision enforced.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Natural Justice, Without Prejudice Privilege, Contract Formation, Letters of Intent
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Enforcement Natural Justice Without Prejudice Privilege Contract Formation Letters of Intent

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ellis Building Contractors Limited

Claimant

Vincent Goldstein

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator's decision was enforceable given alleged breaches of natural justice
  2. 2 Whether improper deployment of 'without prejudice' material constituted apparent bias
  3. 3 Whether the Second Letter of Intent imposed a binding financial cap

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator's decision was enforceable because the issue of the signed contract documents was properly before him, and the deployment of 'without prejudice' material did not give rise to a legitimate fear of bias. The Second Letter of Intent did not impose a binding financial cap in the absence of its incorporation into the contract documents.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for the claimant; adjudicator's decision enforced.

Orders

  • Defendant to pay Ellis £121,566.86 plus VAT and interest as ordered by the adjudicator.
  • Defendant to pay adjudicator's fee of £2,736, reimbursing Ellis.