- Court considers interim payment ‘correction principle’ and adjudication enforcement (J & B Hopkins v Trant Engineering)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Construction analysis: The Technology and Construction Court enforced an adjudication decision for the amount stated in a sub-contractor’s interim payment application, rejecting the main contractor’s argument that enforcement should be refused as the sub-contractor’s entitlement to payment had been ‘corrected’ in subsequent interim payment cycles. The court also dismissed the main contractor’s application for a stay of execution on the ground of manifest injustice.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial