Jacobs UK Ltd V Skanska Construction  - Step by Step
Parties have a significant
degree of leeway in terms of their ability to withdraw and recommence
adjudication proceedings, provided that such tactics do not become oppressive.
It is only if a party’s conduct is both unreasonable and oppressive that the
court can intervene.
With reference to the case
of Jacobs UK Ltd v Skanska Construction UK Ltd  EWHC 2395 (TCC) Rachel
barrister Rachel Coyle of 36 Civil (The 36 Group) will consider the following
- Can party A, the referring
party, withdraw a dispute from adjudication and subsequently refer the same, or
substantially the same, dispute to a second adjudication?
- Can party B seek an
injunction to restrain A from commencing a second adjudication?
During this 30-minute
session the following topics will explored:
- The legal principles before
Jacobs UK Ltd
- Section 37 of the Senior
Courts Act 1981 and how is it relevant?
- How do unilateral
- Ad hoc agreements – What
is the relevance?
- Unreasonable behaviour and
does it deprive the right to adjudicate the dispute?
What are the requirements?
- Watch the recorded webinar and review the reference notes and optional evaluation form to test your legal knowledge.
- This course provides 0.5 - 1 CPD point (depending on length of time spent reviewing the supporting documentation).
- On completion of this course you will:
- • Be familiar with the case of Jacobs UK Ltd v Skanska Construction UK Ltd 
- • Appreciate the significance of this case in terms of how an agreement over the timetable for an adjudication gave rise to binding obligations
- • Have considered how this decision may influence the way in which practitioners’ approach similar situations in the future
What is the target audience?
- Construction law and property practitioners of all levels