Slowly but surely the TCC is working its way through the Construction Act 1996’s payment provisions and providing clarity where there may have been ambiguity. It reminds me of that phrase:
“If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.”
This time it was Carr J and the main issue was whether a contractor’s interim application for payment was valid. The case was Jawaby Property Investment Ltd v The Interiors Group Ltd and it also concerned money held in an escrow account and whether it could (and should) be released to a contractor to enable it to pay its sub-contractors. Continue reading
