‘Smash and grab’ adjudications appear to be in the spotlight again

Gavel_shutterstock_672761524_cred Chodyra Mike PW290318_

In Grove Developments vs S&T (UK) , Justice Coulson commented on the injustice that can flow from payment mechanisms in the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996

In Grove Developments vs S&T (UK) , Justice Coulson commented on the injustice that can flow from payment mechanisms in the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. He identified the difference between the sum stated as due or as an interim payment in consequence of failure to serve a pay less notice and the sum actually due, which is the true valuation of the works.

Coulson awarded Grove a declaration that it was entitled to adjudicate the true value of S&T’s payment application even though Grove’s payment notice and pay less notice might have been invalid.

In a recent case, the court had to decide if a contractor could wind-up a developer that had not paid an adjudication award, even though the contractor had a judgement for the award. It took just a day for the judge to throw out the winding-up petition and order the contractor to pay the developer’s costs in full.

 …

This is premium content

You must be logged in to view premium stories.

Gated access promo

Subscribe for full access

Take out a print and online or online only subscription and you will get immediate access to:

  • Breaking industry news as it happens
  • Expert analysis and comment from industry leaders
  • Unlimited access to all stories, including premium content
  • Full access to all our online archive

To get access to premium content subscribe today

Alternatively REGISTER for a free trial to access up to 4 articles and sign up for email alerts

If you are already a registered user or a subscriber you can SIGN IN now