In March 2014, I wrote about the relaunch of the ICC’s Infrastructure Conditions of Contract, which had been discussed at a presentation to the Society of Construction Law (SCL). This post looks at the redrafted main (re-measurement) contract, which has now been published, along with guidance notes. Continue reading
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ac864/ac8648bacbd23320bf57ea15749d49990f2fb1f8" alt=""
Redrafted Infrastructure Conditions of Contract now published
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/56797/56797e421cdd2a53204a56847032c419705d328c" alt=""
A useful reminder that spurious jurisdictional challenges in adjudication will fail
I think that most of us would agree that the law concerning an adjudicator’s jurisdiction (as well as issues related to natural justice), is now fairly well established and that, given the TCC’s strong support for adjudication, judges will dismiss spurious jurisdictional and natural justice challenges. I therefore get the impression that, while such challenges are regularly put to adjudicators during adjudications, they are not often used to resist enforcement of decisions because paying parties know the probable outcome.
However, when I read Coulson J’s judgment in St Austell Printing Company v Dawnus Construction, I confess to feeling that this was one of those occasions where the spurious challenges had slipped through the net and gone all the way to the TCC. While it may be a step too far to say that the employer needed St Jude (the patron saint of lost causes), rather than St Austol (the Cornish saint from which the name of the town derives), the position isn’t that far off. Continue reading