- Dispute concerning value of a variation was different to dispute concerning its validity (Hitachi Zosen v John Sisk)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Construction analysis: A claimant was able to enforce an adjudication decision regarding the actual value of a variation, notwithstanding an earlier adjudication in which an adjudicator had determined that the variation was valid but that its value was ‘£nil’ for the purposes of a payment application (because of insufficient back up). The Technology and Construction Court considered that these were not the same or substantially the same disputes, and therefore the adjudicator in the second adjudication had had jurisdiction to make his award.
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