Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 22 FEBRUARY 2023

Ravestein B.V. v Trant Engineering Ltd

Fenwick Elliott LLP
Fenwick Elliott LLP
Contributor
Fenwick Elliott LLP

Fenwick Elliott LLP

Fenwick Elliott provides a comprehensive range of legal services on every aspect of the...

View firm profile
Explore more from Fenwick Elliott LLP

Under a subcontract, dated 14 September 2010, based on an amended version of the NEC3 form incorporating Option A and dispute resolution Option W2, Trant engaged Ravestein...

United KingdomLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

2023] EWHC 11 (TCC)

Before Her Honour Judge Kelly sitting as a Judge of the High Court
In the Technology and Construction Court
Judgment delivered 9 January 2023

The facts

Under a subcontract, dated 14 September 2010, based on an amended version of the NEC3 form incorporating Option A and dispute resolution Option W2, Trant engaged Ravestein to carry out certain engineering works. Clauses W2.3(11) and W2.4(2) provided that an adjudicator's decision would be final and binding unless within four weeks of the decision, one of the parties notified the other that it was dissatisfied with a matter decided by the adjudicator and that it intended to refer that matter to the tribunal.

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