Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 01 OCTOBER 2026

Adjudication Enforcement In Focus: When Is An Agreement Agreed?

TLT
TLT
Contributor
TLT

TLT

Business advisors as well as lawyers, TLT works in step with its clients to protect their interests...

View firm profile
Explore more from TLT

When construction project correspondence refers to items being "agreed," does this create a legally binding contract variation? The Technology and Construction Court examined whether email exchanges...

United KingdomLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Project correspondence may refer to certain items being "agreed", but that does not necessarily mean the parties have entered into a legally binding agreement varying the contract. In Clerkenwell Lifestyle v HG Construction, the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) considered whether emails recording a 12-week extension of time (EOT) constituted a binding agreement fixing revised completion dates, or simply formed part of the contractual EOT mechanism. Looking beyond the language used in the correspondence, the Court examined the wider factual context, including the procedure being followed and the parties' subsequent conduct. The case also highlights the difficulties parties face when seeking to challenge enforcement of an adjudicator's decision on the basis of arguments that were not clearly put before the adjudicator.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

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.

See more popular content from