In late October came another application to the court from the successful party in adjudication proceedings to have the decision in their favour enforced.  Challenging enforcement of adjudication decisions is not something to be done lightly because there is an inherent policy that the court's will generally uphold them save for exceptional circumstances.

The losing party in these proceedings had been told to pay retention sums to the successful party but it didn't want to.  It raised a new argument that had not been raised in the adjudication proceedings nor even in the evidence for the purposes of the application.  The argument was that because the Defendants, formerly trading as a firm, had formed a company, the rights in relation to the retention should have been against the company and not the firm.

The argument failed because the firm had participated in the adjudication proceedings without raising that challenge and had therefore waived the right to raise it.  

If there is more to a responding party's argument in an adjudication than simply defending its position then this needs to be brought to the attention of the adjudicator as the first priority.

Case: A.T. STANNARD LIMITED v JAMES TOBUTT AND THOMAS TOBUTT