Seadown Developments LTD v SMCC Construction LTD (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