Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Hackwood Ltd v Areen Design Services Ltd

Hackwood Ltd v Areen Design Services Ltd 31 October 2005 Field J Technology and Construction Court [2005] EWHC 2322 [2005] ArbLR 29 Arbitration proceeding--Parties--Declaratory relief--Parties conducting negotiations containing references to JCT form of contract--Owner applying to court for declaration that owner not a party--Whether JCT terms incorporated into contract--Whether owner a party to the contract (yes)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 72 Incorporation of terms of JCT contract binds parties to arbitration agreement Hackwood owned a listed property in Hampshire. Hackwood and ADS commenced negotiations for refurbishment works to be completed on the house. The parties agreed by letter dated 4 June 2001 that pending the exercise of a contract on the JCT form, ADS would proceed with pre-contract programming, liaison with named contractors, invitation of tenders and obtain possession of the building to set up a site establishment. No contract was ever concluded and the works were completed under the terms of the letter. Disputes arose which were referred to adjudication. Following the adjudicator's award, ADS commenced arbitration. Hackwood took no part in the proceedings and, instead, applied to court for a declaration that it was not a party to the arbitration agreement. Hackwood also argued that they were debarred from participating in the arbitration having http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arbitration Law Reports and Review Oxford University Press

Hackwood Ltd v Areen Design Services Ltd

Arbitration Law Reports and Review , Volume 2005 (1) – Jan 1, 2005

Hackwood Ltd v Areen Design Services Ltd

Arbitration Law Reports and Review , Volume 2005 (1) – Jan 1, 2005

Abstract

31 October 2005 Field J Technology and Construction Court [2005] EWHC 2322 [2005] ArbLR 29 Arbitration proceeding--Parties--Declaratory relief--Parties conducting negotiations containing references to JCT form of contract--Owner applying to court for declaration that owner not a party--Whether JCT terms incorporated into contract--Whether owner a party to the contract (yes)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 72 Incorporation of terms of JCT contract binds parties to arbitration agreement Hackwood owned a listed property in Hampshire. Hackwood and ADS commenced negotiations for refurbishment works to be completed on the house. The parties agreed by letter dated 4 June 2001 that pending the exercise of a contract on the JCT form, ADS would proceed with pre-contract programming, liaison with named contractors, invitation of tenders and obtain possession of the building to set up a site establishment. No contract was ever concluded and the works were completed under the terms of the letter. Disputes arose which were referred to adjudication. Following the adjudicator's award, ADS commenced arbitration. Hackwood took no part in the proceedings and, instead, applied to court for a declaration that it was not a party to the arbitration agreement. Hackwood also argued that they were debarred from participating in the arbitration having

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/hackwood-ltd-v-areen-design-services-ltd-cTiMpVAz4K
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Oxford University Press, 2009
Subject
Judgments
ISSN
2044-8651
eISSN
2044-9887
DOI
10.1093/alrr/2005.1.417
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

31 October 2005 Field J Technology and Construction Court [2005] EWHC 2322 [2005] ArbLR 29 Arbitration proceeding--Parties--Declaratory relief--Parties conducting negotiations containing references to JCT form of contract--Owner applying to court for declaration that owner not a party--Whether JCT terms incorporated into contract--Whether owner a party to the contract (yes)--Arbitration Act 1996, s 72 Incorporation of terms of JCT contract binds parties to arbitration agreement Hackwood owned a listed property in Hampshire. Hackwood and ADS commenced negotiations for refurbishment works to be completed on the house. The parties agreed by letter dated 4 June 2001 that pending the exercise of a contract on the JCT form, ADS would proceed with pre-contract programming, liaison with named contractors, invitation of tenders and obtain possession of the building to set up a site establishment. No contract was ever concluded and the works were completed under the terms of the letter. Disputes arose which were referred to adjudication. Following the adjudicator's award, ADS commenced arbitration. Hackwood took no part in the proceedings and, instead, applied to court for a declaration that it was not a party to the arbitration agreement. Hackwood also argued that they were debarred from participating in the arbitration having

Journal

Arbitration Law Reports and ReviewOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.