Project Overview

The dispute involved a legal argument on intention over which programme or programmes applied to a project after it had been completed. Although the project finished on time The M&E subcontractor considered it had been delayed and disrupted and had suffered losses of circa £805,000. 


An adjudication was commenced on what programme applied; however, the contract had been signed at completion of the works, which incorporated a programme. It was argued by the subcontractor that the contract programme did not happen and the programmes they recorded were correct and showed the delays claimed. If a contract is signed it has retrospective effect and that was found to take precedence so there was no claim. There were no merits in any event as the subcontractor failed to deliver its design and procurement on time so it was doomed in any event. The claim was dismissed thus a significant victory for the Client.



Arbicon Comment

"Assisted Birse in defeating a groundless claim in its entirety against them for delay and disruption in adjudication."

Client Comment

"Another victory for Jon "the Bayonet" Nugent!."