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

South Coast Construction Ltd v Iverson Road Ltd [2017] EWHC 61 (TCC)

19th Jan 2017

On 19 January 2017, Coulson J gave judgment in the case of South Coast Construction Limited v Iverson Road Limited.

The case is likely to have wide ranging implications in respect of the interplay between the Insolvency Act 1986 and enforcement of Adjudicators’ Decisions.

The facts are that South Coast Construction was in receipt of an Adjudicator’s Decision awarding it the principal sum of £861,235.00. Iverson Road failed to pay. In the weeks leading up to the enforcement hearing Iverson Road issued a series of three notices of intention to enter into administration. The effect of each notice (under the Insolvency Act 1986) was to impose a 10-day moratorium upon any proceedings, with the moratorium imposed by the third notice set to expire the day after the enforcement hearing was due to take place. Iverson Road did not inform South Coast Construction or the Court of the notices until two days before the hearing. As such Mr Justice Coulson had to decide whether he should exercise the court’s discretion to lift the moratorium imposed by the 1986 Act and allow the enforcement proceedings to continue.

Coulson J decided that the court should exercise this discretion and importantly held that adjudication enforcement proceedings are unique and without parallel in other divisions of the High Court and that a party that has a decision in its favour from an adjudicator, is “in a much better position than most to argue that the court should exercise its discretion to continue to an enforcement hearing”.

Coulson J also expressed his disapproval of the use of such notices as a ‘tactic’ to avoid enforcement. As such the head of the TCC has given a clear indication that the TCC will allow adjudication enforcement proceedings to continue during a moratorium imposed by the 1986 Act.

Related barrier: Lucie Briggs instructed by Ashfords LLP for the Claimant

To view the full judgment please click here.

See also:

Building

National Law Review

Lexology

19 January 2017





Register for updates

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

 

Register