Roe Brickwork Ltd v Wates Construction Ltd [2013] EWHC 3417 (TCC) (11 November 2013)

Roe Brickwork Ltd v Wates Construction Ltd [2013] EWHC 3417 (TCC) (11 November 2013)

The adjudicator acted within his jurisdiction and did not commit a material breach of natural justice; his methodology for OHP was based on material before him and the issues were fairly canvassed. The decision was sufficiently certain as the Defendant had accepted the amount paid on account, leaving no dispute as to the balance due.

Citation
[2013] EWHC 3417 (TCC)
Parties
Claimant: Roe Brickwork Limited; Defendant: Wates Construction Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Summary Judgment Application to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision / Post Adjudication, Expedited Hearing
Outcome
Summary judgment granted for the Claimant
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Loss and Expense Claims, Overheads and Profit Calculation, Natural Justice
Construction Law Contract Law Adjudication Enforcement Loss and Expense Claims Overheads and Profit Calculation Natural Justice

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roe Brickwork Limited

Claimant

Wates Construction Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Summary Judgment Application to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision / Post Adjudication, Expedited Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator had jurisdiction to assess overheads and profit (OHP) as he did
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator's methodology breached rules of natural justice
  3. 3 Whether the adjudicator's decision lacked certainty and was unenforceable

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator acted within his jurisdiction and did not commit a material breach of natural justice; his methodology for OHP was based on material before him and the issues were fairly canvassed. The decision was sufficiently certain as the Defendant had accepted the amount paid on account, leaving no dispute as to the balance due.

Court Disposition

Summary judgment granted for the Claimant

Orders

  • Claimant awarded £283,467.52 plus interest at 3.5% from 31 January 2013
  • Claimant entitled to recover 50% of adjudicator's fees