UK: Enforcing Adjudicators´ Decisions Against Householders – Update

Last Updated: 25 May 2006

By Sam Bailey, Associate in the UK Construction & Engineering Group at Pinsent Masons

Judge Toulmin's landmark decision in the case of Picardi v Cuniberti that an adjudicator's decision was unenforceable as the adjudication clause in a standard form contract fell foul of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (the Regulations) was not followed in Lovell Projects Limited v Legg and Carver and Westminster Building Company Limited v Beckingham. However, the Court of Appeal has recently considered this issue again in Bryen & Langley Limited v Boston. The Court of Appeal has found that the key factor is whether it can be said that the contract term in question has been imposed on the consumer or not. In cases where the consumer himself has proffered the standard form contract, he will not subsequently be able to argue the terms in question have been imposed on him and will therefore not be able to rely on the Regulations to argue that an adjudicator's decision against him is unenforceable.

It should be remembered that construction contracts with residential occupiers are excluded from the scope of Part 2 of the Housing Grants Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. The building contractor therefore has no right to commence an adjudication against a householder for whom he has undertaken construction work at their dwelling unless he can point to a contract that contains an adjudication clause. In the Picardi case, Mr Picardi commenced enforcement proceedings in the High Court to enforce an adjudicator's award in his favour. The Cunibertis successfully argued that the RIBA Conditions of Engagement which Mr Picardi had proffered had not been incorporated into the contract between the parties. Judge Toulmin went on to consider their argument that even if the RIBA conditions had been incorporated the adjudication clause therein was unenforceable because it fell foul of the Regulations. Regulation 5 provides:

"5(1) A contractual term which has not been individually negotiated shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer".

Schedule 2 of the Regulations sets out a non-exhaustive list of terms may be regarded as unfair. The Cunibertis' pointed to the term set out at letter "q" which states:

"excluding or hindering the consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy, particularly by requiring the consumer to take disputes exclusively to arbitration not covered by legal provisions, unduly restricting the evidence available to him or imposing on him a burden of proof which, according to the applicable law, should lie with another party to the contract".

Judge Toulmin concluded that the adjudication clause within the RIBA terms was unenforceable under the Regulations. He stated:

"I conclude that a procedure which the consumer is required to follow, and which will cause irrecoverable expenditure in either prosecuting or defending it, is something which may hinder the consumer's right to take legal action. The fact that the consumer was deliberately excluded by Parliament from the statutory regime of the HGCRA reinforces this view. Costs in an adjudication can be very significant."

In the subsequent case of Lovell Projects Limited v Legg & Carver, Lovell applied for summary judgment in order to enforce an adjudicator's decision requiring Mr Legg and Ms Carver to pay for work carried out at their home under a JCT Minor Works Contract (which included an adjudication provision). Legg & Carver contended that the adjudicator's decision was unenforceable because the adjudication provisions within the JCT Minor Works Contract fell foul of Regulation 5(1).

Judge Moseley QC dismissed the arguments raised by Legg & Carver and held that there was no imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties for the purpose of Regulation 5. The Judge found that Legg & Carver had insisted that the JCT Minor Works Contract was used for the works and there was therefore no unfairness in Lovell referring the dispute arising out of Legg & Carver's non-payment of its account to adjudication. Like the Cunibertis, Legg & Carver had sought to rely on letter "q" of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The Judge rejected this argument and held that the adjudication provisions within the JCT Minor Works Contract did not exclude or hinder a consumer's right to take legal action or exercise any other legal remedy as adjudication is only binding until the dispute is resolved by legal action, arbitration or agreement.

In his judgment, it could not be said that the terms in the JCT Minor Works Contract required Legg and Carver to take disputes exclusively to arbitration nor did the terms seek to restrict the evidence available to them or alter the burden of proof. Further the Judge found that to be unfair a term must cause a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer and that this must be contrary to the requirement of good faith. The judge referred to the definition of good faith in the judgment of Lord Bingham in Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank:

"of fair and open dealing. Openness requires that the term should be expressed fully, clearly and legibly containing no concealed pitfalls or traps. Appropriate prominence should be given to terms which might operate disadvantageously to the customer. Fair dealing requires that a supplier should not whether deliberately or unconsciously take advantage of the consumer's necessity, indigence, lack of experience, unfamiliarity with the subject matter of the contract, weak bargaining position or any other factor listed in or analogous to those listed in Schedule 2 to the Regulations."

The Judge found that there had been no breach of the requirement of openness as the adjudication clause was fully, clearly and legibly set out in the JCT Minor Works Contract and contained no concealed pitfalls or traps. He found that Lovell had not taken advantage of Legg and Carver's lack of experience, weak bargaining position etc. On the contrary, the form of contract was insisted upon by Legg and Carver who were knowledgeable business people. Judge Moseley accepted the correctness of Judge Toulmin's decision in Picardi v Cuniberti but held that it had no application to the case where the term in question was contained in a form of contract that had been insisted upon by the consumer.

Judge Moseley's reasoning was followed almost entirely by Judge Thornton QC in the case of Westminster Building Company Limited v Beckingham. This case was brought by Westminster to enforce the decision of an adjudicator that Mr Beckingham should pay £122,000 due under a building contract for refurbishment works at his house. One of the arguments raised by Mr Beckingham was that the effect of the Regulations was to make the contractual adjudication clause unenforceable. The Judge found that the contract between the parties (IFC 98) did contain a contractual adjudication clause. Further the Judge found that the contract was insisted upon by Mr Beckingham's agents (who were chartered surveyors) and that Westminster did no more than accept the contract terms offered by them and there was no need therefore for Westminster to draw Mr Beckingham's attention to the potential pitfalls associated with the adjudication clause. For this reason the clause did not contravene the requirement of good faith as defined by Lord Bingham in Director General of Fair Trading. Judge Thornton shared Judge Moseley's view that the clause did not lead to a significant imbalance in the parties' rights to the detriment of Mr Beckingham and did not significantly exclude or hinder Mr Beckingham's right to take legal action or any other legal remedy or restrict the evidence available to him. The adjudication clause was therefore binding on Mr Beckingham.

These three cases were recently considered by the Court of Appeal in the case of Bryen & Langley Limited v Boston. Bryen & Langley brought an appeal against the dismissal of its claim for summary judgment by Judge Seymour QC. They had sought to enforce an adjudicator's award that Mr Boston was liable to pay £65,000 due under a JCT building contract for work at his house. The judge at first instance found that the JCT form had not been incorporated into the building contract and therefore the parties were not bound by the adjudication provisions contained therein. Significantly, the Court of Appeal found that Mr Boston had, through his appointed agents, proffered the JCT form of contract and that the contract concluded by the parties did incorporate the JCT terms, including the adjudication provisions.

The Court of Appeal then moved on to consider whether the adjudication provisions within the JCT form were unfair terms for the purpose of the Regulations. The Court of Appeal chose to focus on Regulation 5(1) and the fact that this makes it clear that a term which has not been individually negotiated will only be considered unfair if it causes an imbalance between the parties' rights and is contrary to the requirements of good faith. The Court of Appeal found that it was also necessary to consider Regulation 6 which requires the assessment of the unfairness of the contractual terms to take into account all of the circumstances attending the conclusion of the contract. The Court of Appeal also considered Lord Bingham's judgment in Director General of Fair Trading. At paragraph 45 of the Court of Appeal's judgment, Mr Justice Rimer stated:

". . . in assessing whether a term that has not been individually negotiated is "unfair" for the purposes of Regulation 5(1) it is necessary to consider not merely the commercial effects of the term on the relative rights of the parties but, in particular, whether the term has been imposed on the consumer in circumstances which justify a conclusion that the supplier has fallen short of the requirement of fair dealing. The situation at which Regulation 5(1) is directed is one in which the supplier, who will normally be presumed to be in the stronger bargaining position, has imposed a standard-form contract on the consumer containing terms which are, or might be said to be, loaded unfairly in favour of the supplier. The Picardi case was one in which the terms had been imposed by the claimant architect (in that case, the supplier). In the Lovell case the terms had been imposed on the supplier by the employers' (i.e. the consumers) architect, the Judge finding not only that they caused no significant imbalance to the employers, but that nor in the circumstances in which the contract came to be made was there any question of any lack of good faith or fair dealing by the supplier contractor. HH Judge Thornton QC arrived at a similar result, in like circumstances, Westminster Building Company Limited v Beckingham.

In my judgment, Mr Boston faces exactly the same difficulties in relation to his Regulation 5(1) argument as did the other consumers in the Lovell and Beckingham cases. His problem is that the relevant provisions were not imposed upon him by B&L, the supplier. It was Mr Boston (the consumer), acting through his agent Mr Welling who imposed them on the supplier since they were specified in Mr Welling's original invitation to tender . . ."

The Court of Appeal's decision has therefore left open the door for householders to argue that adjudication clauses within standard form contracts are unenforceable in circumstances where the contract has been imposed upon them by the contractor.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions