7 Jun 2024
Bricomp failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that the Adjudicator breached natural justice or acted beyond jurisdiction; the AD stands and leave to enforce it is granted; setting aside application dismissed and enforcement allowed with costs payable by Bricomp to Rentak Segar.
20 May 2024
The Court held that the Adjudicator acted within jurisdiction and afforded natural justice; paragraph 3 of the Supplementary Agreement incorporated PAM 2006 so the Final Account fell under Clause 30.10; UM's challenges were merits-based and barred by s15 CIPAA; no manifest error was shown regarding exercise of powers under s25 CIPAA; accordingly OS214 is dismissed with costs and OS186 is allowed and the Adjudication Decision is enforced under s28 CIPAA.
10 May 2024
The Plaintiff, being a sole proprietorship, lacked locus standi to sue in the business name; therefore Originating Summons No. WA-24C-144-09/2023 was dismissed because a sole proprietor must sue in his own name trading as the business and the adjudication naming the business does not cure this defect.
15 Mar 2024
The Court found the Adjudicator addressed the contested issues, did consider Progress Report No.22, the Certificate of Taking Over, and the set-off/back-charges, and did not commit clear and unequivocal error; challenges to the Adjudicator's findings were merits issues unsuitable for a stay; ESSB was found to be a going concern; accordingly the stay application was dismissed and enforcement of the Adjudication Decision was allowed with costs.
8 Oct 2020
Plaintiff proved conditions in s30 CIPAA; once plaintiff proved non-payment, written request and non-payment by principal, evidential burden under s106 EA shifted to defendant to prove no sum was due or payable at time of request; defendant failed to discharge that burden and suppressed material documents (adverse inference under s114(g)); court therefore ordered defendant (as principal) to pay the adjudicated amounts (excluding adjudication costs), awarded interest and costs and lifted the corporate veil to reveal common family control which reinforced the finding of self-serving motive to a…
27 Nov 2019
The Payment Claim failed to comply with the mandatory content requirements of s.5(2) CIPAA because it did not expressly identify the cause of action nor contain an express statement that the claim was made under CIPAA; that defect vitiated the adjudicator's jurisdiction and the adjudication decision was set aside.
13 Nov 2019
Plaintiff failed to show material breach of natural justice or that the adjudicator exceeded his statutory jurisdiction; the adjudicator lawfully relied on acknowledged reminders, exercised s25 CIPAA powers to assess workdone and apply standard contract practice for retention, and properly applied s36 for payment period, therefore the originating summons to set aside was dismissed with costs.