Citation: EWHC 2910 (TCC)
Nature of case: Carillion sought a Part 8 declaration that an adjudicator had no jurisdiction to deal with an adjudication referred to him by the defendant which was substantially the same as a previous adjudication resolved between the parties in 2003. Agreeing with the claimant, the court found that both disputes referred were substantially the sameEach involved a claim for delay and disruption based loss and expense, caused by breaches of contract and default on the part of Carillion. Subsequent to such decision, if the defendant allowed time to expire or did not submit a notice of dissatisfaction within 60 days of the second adjudicator’s decision, he may be without a remedy.
