Norwest Holst Ltd v Carfin Developments Ltd [2008] ScotCS CSOH_138 (18 September 2008)

Norwest Holst Ltd v Carfin Developments Ltd [2008] ScotCS CSOH_138 (18 September 2008)

There was no real dispute or difference to refer to arbitration because the defenders' arguments regarding the validity of the certificate and their right to withhold payment were untenable. The engineer's certificate was valid, and the defenders' failure to serve a withholding notice precluded them from withholding payment. The pursuers were entitled to decree for the certified sum plus interest.

Citation
[2008] ScotCS CSOH_138
Parties
Pursuer: Norwest Holst Limited; Defender: Carfin Developments Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
18 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Commercial Construction Contract Dispute / Debate on Motion to Sist for Arbitration and for Summary Decree
Outcome
Decree granted in favour of the pursuers for the principal sum plus interest; motion to sist refused; expenses awarded to pursuers.
Legal Topics
Certificates and Payment Under Construction Contracts, Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Clauses, Withholding Notices Under Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, Interest on Overdue Payments
Construction Law Contract Law Civil Procedure Certificates and Payment Under Construction Contracts Arbitration and Dispute Resolution Clauses Withholding Notices Under Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 Interest on Overdue Payments

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Norwest Holst Limited

Pursuer

Carfin Developments Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Construction Contract Dispute / Debate on Motion to Sist for Arbitration and for Summary Decree

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a real dispute to be referred to arbitration under clause 66 of the ICE Conditions
  2. 2 Whether the engineer's certificate dated 21 September 2007 is valid under clause 60(2)
  3. 3 Whether the defender can withhold payment without serving a withholding notice under section 111(1) of the Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996

Ratio Decidendi

There was no real dispute or difference to refer to arbitration because the defenders' arguments regarding the validity of the certificate and their right to withhold payment were untenable. The engineer's certificate was valid, and the defenders' failure to serve a withholding notice precluded them from withholding payment. The pursuers were entitled to decree for the certified sum plus interest.

Court Disposition

Decree granted in favour of the pursuers for the principal sum plus interest; motion to sist refused; expenses awarded to pursuers.

Orders

  • Refuse motion to sist for arbitration.
  • Sustain pursuers' fourth plea in law and grant decree de plano for £216,860 plus interest to be calculated and agreed.