- Default payment notice and pay less notice were valid (Surrey and Sussex NHS Trust v Logan)
- Original news
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Default interim payment notice
- Validity of pay less notice
- Case details
Construction analysis: The court declared that a contractor’s default interim payment notice (given under the JCT Intermediate Building Contract 2011) in the absence of a payment notice from the contract administrator was valid, even though it was not referred to in a covering email (sent in advance of a meeting about the final account). While there was a high threshold for the contractor to meet as to the validity of the notice, it was to be construed in accordance with the contractual and factual background. The court also declared that a valid pay less notice had been given on behalf of the employer, even though it was ‘contingent’ (the sender’s primary position was that the default interim payment notice was not valid). While the sender must have the requisite intention when giving a pay less notice, this was to be derived from the manner in which the notice would have informed the reasonable recipient.
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