J & B Hopkins Limited v A & V Building Soltuions Limited
[2023] EWHC 301 (TCC)
Northumbrian Water Limited v Doosan Enpure Limited & Anor
14 November 2022
[2022] EWHC 2881 (TCC)
High Court
A water company won a court case to get paid £22.4 million. The other company tried to delay things by sending the case to a different type of judge, but the court said the water company was already right to get paid.
Key Facts
- •Northumbrian Water Limited (NWL) sought summary judgment to enforce a £22,458,540.04 adjudication decision against Doosan Enpure Limited and Tilbury Douglas Construction Limited (JV).
- •The JV argued the dispute should be arbitrated under their contract's dispute resolution clause (W2).
- •The contract included a tiered dispute resolution process: adjudication followed by arbitration.
- •The JV served a Notice of Dissatisfaction, objecting to parts of the adjudication decision but not challenging its validity.
- •The JV applied for a stay of proceedings under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
Legal Principles
Adjudication decisions are binding and enforceable unless the adjudicator acted outside jurisdiction or in serious breach of natural justice.
Various cases including *Macob Civil Engineering Ltd v Morrison Construction Ltd*, *Bouygues (UK) Ltd v Dahl-Jensen (UK) Ltd*, *Carillion v Devonport Royal Dockyard*
A general reservation of position on jurisdiction in adjudication may be ineffective if specific grounds were known but not articulated.
*Bresco Electrical Services Ltd v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical)*
Under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996, the court must grant a stay of proceedings if the dispute falls under an arbitration agreement, unless the agreement is null, void, inoperative, or incapable of performance.
Arbitration Act 1996, section 9
A ‘dispute’ for the purposes of an arbitration agreement can include a dispute over the enforcement of an adjudicator's decision.
*Halki Shipping Corporation v Sopex Oils Ltd*, *Collins (Contractors) Limited v Baltic Quay Management (1994) Limited*
Courts construe arbitration agreements to give effect to the parties' intentions, considering the express wording and established principles of contract interpretation.
*Fiona Trust v Privalov*, *Wood v Capita Insurance Services Ltd*
Outcomes
Summary judgment granted to NWL for £22,458,540.04 plus interest and costs.
The adjudication decision was valid and enforceable; the JV's failure to pay constituted a dispute, but not one requiring a stay for arbitration. The JV waived its right to challenge the adjudication's validity by not doing so during the adjudication process and the Notice of Dissatisfaction didn't challenge validity.
JV's application for a stay of proceedings under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 refused.
The dispute over enforcement of the adjudication decision was not a matter that the contract required to be referred to arbitration, given the contract's specific provision making the adjudication decision binding unless revised by the tribunal, and the JV's failure to challenge the validity of the adjudication decision in a timely manner.
Similar Cases
Friedhelm Eronat v CPNC International (Chad) Ltd & Anor
[2024] EWHC 2880 (Comm)
Iluminesia Limited (t/a Alterego Facades) v RFL Facades Limited
[2023] EWHC 3122 (TCC)
Quaid-e-Azam Thermal Power (Private) Ltd v Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited
[2024] EWHC 70 (Comm)
Bell Building Limited v TClarke Contracting Limited
[2024] EWHC 1929 (TCC)