Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
Transcribed by BEVERLEY F. NUNNERY & CO Official Shorthand Writers and Tape Transcribers Quality House, Quality Court, Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1HP Tel: 020 7831 5627 Fax: 020 7831 7737
MR. M. ROWLANDS appeared on behalf of the Claimant. MR. D. SEARS QC appeared on behalf of the Defendant. ____________________
The final date for payment of an amount due in an interim payment by clause 30.3.6 was agreed to be 28 days from the receipt by the employer of the contractor's application for interim payment. In this case the date would be 27 th July of 2006.
"We have considered your submission and enclose our assessment and valuation together with our comments. You will see that we do not consider that a further payment to Rok Build is required and due under the contract. You will also see that it is our view that a payment of �8,487 is due to be paid by Rok Build to the Employer. Please accept this letter and contents as notices under clauses 30.3.3 and 30.3.4 of the Contract from the Employer."
Details of when and where the dispute has arisen are given as: "The dispute has arisen at the school", and the date and the address is given. As to nature of the redress sought, it is put in these terms: "Rok seeks of the adjudicator a direction that the employer should comply with the requirements of clause 30.3.5 of the contract and to make payment of the amount stated". The response asserts that the contractor under the contract is stated to be Walter Llewellyn & Sons Limited.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.