Articles

This article surrounds the case of a 'smash and grab' adjudication which was very the subject of joined enforcement and part 8 proceedings before Waksman J in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) earlier this year.  

Notes from our Chairman Richard Booth.

Following ISG Construction Ltd v Seevic College [2014] EWHC 4007 (TCC) most of us are all too familiar with the concept of default payment notices and subsequent ‘smash and grab’ adjudications.   

Uncertainty about timing of the value adjudication has the potential to undermine the effectiveness of the amendments to the payment provisions of the Construction Act because it might be open to the payer to start a value adjudication and get a decision in its favour as quickly as the payee could enforce its right to payment of the notified sum.  

This article seeks to assess the degree to which the decisions in Grove have unloosened that knot, or merely entangled us in other, related, difficulties.