Cases - Nolan Davis Ltd v Steven P Catton
Record details
- Name
- Nolan Davis Ltd v Steven P Catton
- Date
- [2000]
- Citation
- Adj.L.R. 02/22
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Adjudication - enforcement - application for summary judgment - consent order - Tomlin order - allocation of costs - jurisdiction - stay of execution - rectification - VAT
- Summary
-
Disputes had arisen between the parties, which Nolan had referred to adjudication.
Mr Catton had argued before the adjudicator that he was not the correct contracting party but that it was instead one of his companies. The adjudicator had determined that Mr Catton was the correct contracting party and had proceeded to make a decision on that basis.
Nolan sought to enforce the decision of the adjudicator by way of an application for summary judgment, which Mr Catton sought to resist on the following grounds:
- There was no concluded contract between the parties.
- The adjudicator had decided on the allocation of costs between the parties when he had no jurisdiction to do so.
- Catton sought a stay of execution of the summary judgment on grounds relating to his means.
With regard to point (1), the court concluded that the parties had agreed to be bound by the adjudicator's decision as to jurisdiction. Even though the arguments as formulated in these proceedings were not put to the adjudicator, the court was not prepared to revisit his decision.
With regard to point (2), the court concluded that both parties had applied for costs and had, thereby, conferred jurisdiction on the adjudicator to determine the allocation of costs between them. The court followed the decision in Northern Developments (Cumbria) Ltd v J & J Nichol (2000).
With regard to point (3), the court concluded that to grant a stay of execution on grounds relating to means would drive a coach and horses through the adjudication scheme, and would frustrate parliament's intention.