After the summer slowdown, the TCC is back in full swing and judgments are starting to appear on BAILII. Of last week’s new additions, the one that really caught my eye was KNN Colburn LLP v GD City Holdings Ltd, mainly because GD City contended that there were multiple reasons why the adjudicator’s decision shouldn’t be enforced.
I have not seen cases about inserting the wrong name in a contract for ages. They must be like London buses. None come along for ages and then two come along in quick succession. That is exactly what has recently happened. Over the summer we’ve had Henderson J’s decision in Derek Hodd Ltd v Climate Change Capital Ltd and then Ramsey J’s decision in Liberty Mercian Ltd v Cuddy Civil Engineering Ltd.
Both cases concerned the not uncommon mistake of using the wrong name from a group of companies when drafting the contract. It may appear obvious but it is clearly essential to correctly identify the parties to a contract, otherwise there will be no valid contract to enforce. These cases both raise questions about “misnomer” where there is the wrong or inaccurate use of a name or a term (misnomer allows the court to substitute the correct name for an incorrect one, but the test is not an easy one). Continue reading
I may have tweaked a line from The Clash’s, “Should I stay or should I go now“, but applying for a stay of execution in adjudication enforcement proceedings seems to be on the increase, at least so far as reported judgments are concerned. I can think of at least four cases since May, and my take is that it is a reflection of the difficult economic circumstances that many construction (and other) companies find themselves in, combined with the impact of the payment provisions brought in by the amendments to the Construction Act 1996.
