Award

Macob Civil Engineering v Morrison Construction

Courts of England and Wales (TCC) · Construction and adjudication · England and Wales · 12 February 1999

Why it matters

The first Technology and Construction Court decision enforcing a construction adjudication under the 1996 Act. Dyson J's approach, enforce first and let the merits be fought later, made adjudication work in practice and underpins every enforcement decision since. If you read one case on UK adjudication, read this one.

Summary

Parliament created construction adjudication in the 1996 Act to fix a chronic industry problem: cash stopped flowing down the supply chain whenever a dispute arose, and small contractors went under waiting for justice. Adjudication promised a decision in 28 days that binds the parties until the dispute is finally resolved by court, arbitration or agreement. Macob won an adjudication about withheld payment; Morrison refused to pay, arguing the decision was invalid and therefore not really a decision at all. Dyson J rejected that as a recipe for killing the new system at birth. The whole point, he said, was a speedy mechanism for settling disputes on a provisional interim basis, and the right response to a complaint about an adjudicator's decision is to comply now and challenge later. The court enforced the decision by summary judgment, which became the standard route. The phrase that stuck, pay now, argue later, captures the policy: cash flow is the lifeblood of the construction industry, and an adjudicator's decision is to be obeyed even if it might eventually be shown to be wrong. Every enforcement battle since, about jurisdiction, natural justice or insolvency, plays out against the baseline Macob set: courts will enforce robustly and treat challenges narrowly.

The detail

Parties: Macob Civil Engineering Ltd v Morrison Construction Ltd

Case number: [1999] EWHC Technology 254

Outcome: Adjudicator's decision enforced: pay now, argue later.

Applicable law: Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, section 108; the Scheme for Construction Contracts.

Issues in play: The new statutory promise of a quick, binding-for-now decision against the loser's instinct to stall by attacking the decision's validity in court.

Read the full decision at BAILII

Locus Standi links to the source decision and publishes its own plain-language summary. It does not reproduce the text of the award.

Back to the awards board