Citation: CILL 2329 and [2006] BLM Vol. 23 No. 47 TCC
Nature of case: In the first adjudication, the adjudicator had held that Vascroft had failed to show entitlement to an extension of time.
Quietfield subsequently began a second and then a third adjudication and the (same) adjudicator held that he was bound by his original finding and refused to consider Vascroft’s new evidence challenging it.
Quietfield commenced enforcement proceedings in the TCC but the court held that the adjudicator had been wrong not to consider the new evidence in the third adjudication. See other reports: [2006] All ER (D) 17 TCC
