Skip to content

Structure Consulting v Maroush Food Production

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.


Related People

Portfolio Builder


Select the practice areas that you would like to download or add to the portfolio

Download Add to portfolio
Portfolio close
Title Type CV Email

Remove All