The case of Providence Building Services Limited v
Hexagon Housing Association Limited concerns the
interpretation of a termination clause in a JCT Design and Build
Contract. The decision from the Supreme Court reverses the decision
made by the Court of Appeal around termination in the context of
repeated late payments, and provides clarity on the interpretation
of the specific clause as well as the court's approach to the
interpretation of construction contracts generally.
The background to the appeal
Hexagon Housing Association Limited (the
“Employer”) and Providence Building
Services Limited (the “Contractor”)
entered into a contract to build social housing.
A dispute arose which centred on the Employer's late
payment of two interim payments. The Contractor served a
‘notice of specified default' in relation to the first
late interim payment. The Employer subsequently paid the
outstanding sum within the 28 day notice period under Clause 8.9.3,
meaning the