Structure Consulting v Maroush Food Production [2017] QBD (TCC)

Robert Stokell acted for Maroush, the employer, who was the defendant in an enforcement claim and the claimant in a Part 8 claim for declarations mainly relating to whether or not the parties had agreed a JCT contract, and whether a pay less notice served by the employer was valid.

Mrs Justice O’Farrell held that the issues here were sufficiently defined to enable them to be dealt with by way of a hybrid procedure, that is, under Part 8 but with some room for fact finding (see Forest Heath DC v ISG Jackson [2010] EWHC 322 (TCC)). Directions were given for the service of evidence, and for a two day hearing where witnesses could be called and cross-examined.

The court took a robust approach to the enforcement of the adjudication decision, and refused a stay of execution. The contractor’s application for indemnity costs was refused. Maroush was given additional time to pay part of the sum awarded.


Back to News


About cookies on our website

Our site uses cookies to improve your experience of certain areas of the site. You may delete and block all cookies from this site, but as a result parts of the site may not work as intended. To find out more about what cookies are, which cookies we use on this website and how to delete and block cookies, please see our privacy policy page.

Click on the button below to accept the use of cookies on this website (this will prevent the dialogue box from appearing on future visits).