ROK Construction Ltd v Angel Fish Ltd [2018] JRC 189 (09 October 2018)

ROK Construction Ltd v Angel Fish Ltd [2018] JRC 189 (09 October 2018)

The JCT contract as amended by Addendum 1 does not constitute a clear election to refer disputes to arbitration. The contractual mechanism for electing arbitration required a positive act (deletion of words) which was not performed. Addendum 1 does not expressly override or amend this requirement. Therefore, there is no binding agreement to arbitrate.

Citation
[2018] JRC 189
Parties
Representor: ROK Construction Limited; Respondent: Angel Fish Limited
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
09 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Contractual Dispute (preliminary Issue) / Preliminary Issue on Contract Interpretation
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Arbitration Clauses, Standard Form Construction Contracts, Effect of Contractual Amendments, Jurisdiction of Courts Vs Arbitration
Contract Law Arbitration Interpretation of Arbitration Clauses Standard Form Construction Contracts Effect of Contractual Amendments Jurisdiction of Courts Vs Arbitration

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ROK Construction Limited

Representor

Angel Fish Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contractual Dispute (preliminary Issue) / Preliminary Issue on Contract Interpretation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the parties agreed to refer disputes under the JCT contract to arbitration in accordance with Jersey law
  2. 2 Whether Addendum 1 to the JCT contract constitutes an election for arbitration

Ratio Decidendi

The JCT contract as amended by Addendum 1 does not constitute a clear election to refer disputes to arbitration. The contractual mechanism for electing arbitration required a positive act (deletion of words) which was not performed. Addendum 1 does not expressly override or amend this requirement. Therefore, there is no binding agreement to arbitrate.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • Declaration sought by the Representor is refused