Here the TCC enforced an adjudicator's decision, even though there was no agreement as to the basis of the contract pursuant to which he was appointed. RMP had provided groundworks to Chalcroft, but after an application went unpaid and Chalcroft failed to serve a payless notice in time, they referred the matter to adjudication where the adjudicator found in their favour. This was in spite of the fact that Chalcroft contended that the contract had been concluded on a different basis from that alleged by RMP, which would have meant their payless notice was in time.
The judge noted that, whichever version of the contract formation was correct, the adjudicator would have been appointed under the Scheme for Construction Contracts and his appointment was therefore valid. It did not matter therefore which route had been used to conclude the contract, provided a contract was in place. The fact that the referring party may have been incorrect as to the circumstances of the formation of the contract went to the substantive outcome of the dispute, but did not affect jurisdiction of the adjudicator, who had been validly appointed.
To read more, please click here.