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.
