ATG Services (Scotland) LTD against Ogilvie Construction LTD (Court of Session) [2024] CSOH 94 (04 October 2024)

ATG Services (Scotland) LTD against Ogilvie Construction LTD (Court of Session) [2024] CSOH 94 (04 October 2024)

The adjudicator did not breach natural justice; both parties had opportunity to address the course of conduct issue, the adjudicator applied the legal principle asserted by the pursuer and referenced Jawaby as an example, and any error in law was intra vires and not grounds for refusing enforcement. The reasons given were adequate and the defence was irrelevant.

Citation
[2024] CSOH 94
Parties
Pursuer: ATG Services (Scotland) Limited; Defender: Ogilvie Construction Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision / Outer House, Court of Session, Accelerated Debate
Outcome
Decree granted de plano for the principal sum sued for, with interest and expenses on agent and client, client paying scale.
Legal Topics
Adjudication Enforcement, Natural Justice, Course of Conduct, Payment Applications, Reasoned Decisions
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Adjudication Enforcement Natural Justice Course of Conduct Payment Applications Reasoned Decisions

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 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ATG Services (Scotland) Limited

Pursuer

Ogilvie Construction Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action to Enforce Adjudicator's Decision / Outer House, Court of Session, Accelerated Debate

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adjudicator breached natural justice by applying English law or failing to engage with Scots law principles
  2. 2 Whether the adjudicator failed to provide adequate reasons for his decision
  3. 3 Whether a course of conduct validated service of payment applications contrary to contract terms

Ratio Decidendi

The adjudicator did not breach natural justice; both parties had opportunity to address the course of conduct issue, the adjudicator applied the legal principle asserted by the pursuer and referenced Jawaby as an example, and any error in law was intra vires and not grounds for refusing enforcement. The reasons given were adequate and the defence was irrelevant.

Court Disposition

Decree granted de plano for the principal sum sued for, with interest and expenses on agent and client, client paying scale.

Orders

  • Defender liable to pursuer for £1,081,254.83 (excluding VAT), with interest, fees and expenses.
  • Defender found liable in expenses of and incidental to the debate on agent and client, client paying scale.