![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
England and Wales High Court (Technology and Construction Court) Decisions |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Technology and Construction Court) Decisions >> Lulu Construction Ltd v Mulalley & Co Ltd [2016] EWHC 1852 (TCC) (17 March 2016) URL: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/TCC/2016/1852.html Cite as: [2016] EWHC 1852 (TCC) |
[New search]
[Context]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable RTF version]
[Help]
TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION
COURT
7 Rolls Buildings Fetter Lane London EC4A 1NL |
||
B e f o r e :
Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the TCC
____________________
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Claimant/Respondent |
|
- v - |
||
MULALLEY & CO LIMITED |
Defendant/Appellant |
____________________
8th Floor, 165 Fleet Street, London, EC4A 2DY
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7404 1424
Web: www.DTIGLOBAL.com Email: TTP@dtiglobal.eu
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
____________________
MS ANNA LANEY (instructed by Silver Shemmings) appeared on behalf of the Defendant
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
"The ambit of the reference to arbitration or adjudication may unavoidably be widened by the nature of the defence or defences put forward by the defending party in adjudication or arbitration… In my view, one should look at the essential claim which has been made and the fact it has been challenged as opposed to the precise grounds upon which it had been rejected or not accepted. Thus, it is open to any defendant to raise any defence to the claim when it's referred to adjudication…"
Then, at paragraph 30(d):
"It follows from the above that if the basic claim, assertion or position has been put forward by one party and the other disputes it, the dispute referred to adjudication will or may include claims for relief which are consequential upon an incidental to it and which enable the dispute, effectively, to be resolved. Thus, even if the claim did not as such seek a declaration or discretionary interest or costs, it is so connected with and ancillary to the referred dispute as properly to be considered as part of it. There must be limits to this which can be determined by analysing what the essential dispute referred is."