Bresco<\/em> that as they had provided adequate security, they were entitled to enforce the original adjudicator\u2019s decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThere are essentially two points to come out of the Court of Appeal\u2019s judgment. The narrow point was that the alleged security offered by John Doyle\u2019s liquidators was insufficient, lacked transparency and did not in practice provide the security claimed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The wider point was Lord Justice Coulson\u2019s view on the issue \u2018Lurking in the Shadows\u2019, being the whole matter of whether a company in liquidation can ever actually enforce an adjudicator\u2019s decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Lord Justice Coulson didn\u2019t say it would never be possible for a company in liquidation to enforce an adjudication decision, but the type of security that would be required would probably render the benefit of ever trying to do so a futile gesture. He dismissed the idea of paying the sum into Court as a sensible solution as this deprived every party of cash flow. He made clear that the type of security that may be acceptable effectively amounted to an indemnity from the liquidator and a promise to ring fence any sum paid in settlement of an adjudicator\u2019s decision, until a full-blown Court case had been tried. In such circumstances, it is difficult to see what benefit a liquidator would get from pursing enforcement of an adjudicator\u2019s decision (and for that matter ever bringing an adjudication), because at best there would be some money sitting somewhere that they couldn\u2019t use. This pot of money would be unavailable to all parties until the outcome of Court proceedings (which could be two plus years). And notwithstanding these issues, liquidators are not known for giving indemnities!<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So is this the end of such claims? For those of us who find ourselves on the other side of adjudications commenced by insolvent companies it can be difficult to know whether to fight the adjudication. If there is a genuine crossclaim or defence, is it worth spending your client\u2019s money fighting an adjudication that is unlikely to be enforced? John Doyle<\/em> may see the end of such attempts by liquidators of companies \u2013 but as we\u2019ve almost certainly said before, only time will tell.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n\n\n
<\/figure>\n
About the author<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\nAndrew is one of our Partners, dealing both with construction disputes and non-contentious construction. Read more about him here<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
This article is from December’s edition of Aggregate, which featured a month-by-month review of 2021. This is October’s entry. To read the complete newsletter as a PDF, click here. The case of John Doyle Construction Limited (in liquidation) v. Erith Contractors Limited was decided by the Court of Appeal in October 2021.\u00a0 The case was…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1008,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[123],"tags":[131,128],"yoast_head":"\n
Adjudicating while insolvent — Archor LLP<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n