The application of the ‘two contracts principle’, requirements for serving notice, and breach of natural justice (Liverpool City Council v Vital Infrastructure Asset Management (Viam) Ltd (In Administration)

Table of contents

• What are the practical implications of this case?
• What was the background?
• What did the court decide?
• The ‘two contracts principle’
• Service of the notice
• Nullity
• Natural justice
• Case details

Article summary

Construction analysis: In Liverpool City Council v Vital Infrastructure Asset Management (Viam) Ltd, the Technology and Construction Court found that an adjudicator did not lack jurisdiction to determine a dispute arising under two contracts, because, inter alia, the declarations sought under each contract were ‘staging posts along the way’ to the ultimate resolution of a single dispute. The court also considered whether an error in relation to the addressee in a notice meant that it was not validly served. Finally, it provided guidance on when a decision, based on an error made within the adjudicator’s jurisdiction and not a nullity, will nonetheless be unenforceable as a breach of natural justice. Written by Katy Handley, pupil barrister at 4 Pump Court.