ADJUDICATION: ONE CONTRACT OR TWO?

In Supablast (Nationwide) Ltd v Story Rail Ltd [2010] EWHC 56 (TCC), [2010] All ER (D) 136 (Jan) Mr Justice Akenhead rejected a jurisdictional challenge to a decision of an adjudicator made on the basis that there were two sub-contracts in existence between the parties and not one as had been held by the adjudicator. He held that that there was no real prospect of it being established that there were two sub-contracts in existence between the parties. He also held that estoppel by convention applied to preclude the defendant from maintaining that the parties had concluded two separate contracts. There being no real prospect of the defendant being able to defend the claim, summary judgment was granted to enforce the decision of the adjudicator.

The facts

The claimants, Supablast (Nationwide) Ltd (hereafter ‘Supablast’), were invited by the defendants, Story Rail Ltd (hereafter ‘Story’), to tender for grit blasting and painting work on a project on which Story had been engaged. After discussions between the parties Supablast sent to Story a letter on 17 December 2007, which stated: