Cookie consent

This website uses cookies to collect information about how you use this website. Atkin Chambers uses this information to make the website work as well as possible and improve the services provided by members and staff. You may choose to accept all cookies or chose to manage your cookie settings here:

Cookies on atkinchambers.com

Cookies are files saved on your phone, tablet or computer when you visit a website.

Atkin Chambers uses this information to make the website work as well as possible and improve the services provided by members and staff. You may choose to accept all cookies or chose to manage your cookie settings here:

Cookie settings

Atkin Chambers Limited use two types of cookie files, analytical cookies and necessary cookies. You can choose which cookies you are happy for us to use.

Analytical cookies that measure website use

Atkin Chambers Limited use Google Analytics to measure how you use the website so it can be improved based on user needs. Atkin Chambers do not allow Google to use or share the data about how you use this site.

Google Analytics sets cookies that store anonymised information about:

  • how you got to the site
  • the pages you visit on atkinchambers.com, and how long you spend on each page
  • what you click on while you’re visiting the site

Strictly necessary cookies

These essential cookies do things like remember your progress through a form (for example if you register for updates). They always need to be on.

Save changes

Seadown Developments LTD v SMCC Construction LTD (2017)

6th Nov 2017

Lucie Briggs represented SMCC to oppose Part 8 proceedings brought by Seadown seeking a declaration that an adjudicator’s decision in SMCC’s favour was unenforceable due to the adjudicator’s alleged misinterpretation of a contractual clause, a point Seadown said was suitable for Part 8 determination. SMCC argued that the adjudicator’s decision was correct, but even if he had erred, such an error would not affect the enforceability of the decision and the use of Pt 8 proceedings was not appropriate, relying upon the decision of Mr Justice Coulson (as he then was) in Hutton Construction Ltd v Wilson Properties (London) Ltd [2017] EWHC 517 (TCC).

Jefford J held that the points of principle set out in Hutton applied and this case did not fall within those. Even if the adjudicator had been wrong on his interpretation of clause 2.24.5, it would not render his decision unenforceable. Further that the vast majority of the Decision did not turn on that clause in any event. Summary judgment was granted to SMCC.

Lucie Briggs instructed by Steele Raymond LLP for the defendant SMCC.

6 November 2017





Related Juristictions

Register for updates

To keep in touch with news and updates from Atkin Chambers:

 

Register