Andrew Wallace Ltd v Artisan Regeneration Ltd & Anor, Court of Appeal - Technology and Construction Court, January 10, 2006, [2006] EWHC 15 (TCC)

Reporting Judge: [2006] EWHC 15 (TCC)

President: Andrew Wallace Ltd v Artisan Regeneration Ltd & Anor

Linked as:

Extract

Andrew Wallace Ltd v Artisan Regeneration Ltd & Anor, Court of Appeal - Technology and Construction Court, January 10, 2006, [2006] EWHC 15 (TCC)

Neutral Citation Number: [2006] EWHC 15 TCC

Case number TTC 121/05

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE

QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION

SALFORD DISTRICT REGISTRY

TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT

BIRMINGHAM CIVIL JUSTICE CENTRE

33 BULL STREET

BIRMINGHAM B4 6DS

Date: 10 January 2006

Before Her Honour Judge Frances Kirkham

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

ANDREW WALLACE LIMITED

Claimant

and

Defendant

(1) ARTISAN REGENERATION LIMITED

(2)ARTISAN HOLDINGS LIMITED

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mr Sean Brannigan of Counsel (instructed by Pinsent Masons) for the Claimant

Mr Gareth Jessop of Pannone & Partners for the Defendants

Date of hearing: 21 December 2005

Date of draft reasons for judgment: 22 December 2005

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

JUDGMENT 1. The claimant, Andrew Wallace Ltd is an architectural company. The defendants are in business as developers and in relation to real estate.

2. The claimant issued proceedings in November 2005 to enforce the decision of an adjudicator dated 28 October 2005. On 21 December 2005, the court heard an application by the claimant for summary judgment against the defendants. I am obliged to Mr Brannigan for the claimant and Mr Jessop for the defendants for their assistance with this matter.

3. The court decided that the defendants had no real prospect of succeeding in their defence to the claimant's claim and, there being no other reason why judgment should not be granted, ordered the defendants to pay the claimant the s...

See the full content of this document