FAREWELL TO THE “SMASH AND GRAB”
Farewell To The “Smash And Grab”
For those “Smash And Grab” participants in the Construction Industry who have been living in a cave for the last 20 years, it may come as a surprise that legislation which took effect in 1998 and 2011 introduced a new payment regime with concepts such as “withholding notices” and “payless notices”.
The regime imposed stringent obligations on paying parties to issue within short periods of time after receipt of invoices a notification setting out any sum which was not to be paid and specifying the reasons why.
Many employers and main contractors have continued to be caught out by this payment regime with main contractors and subcontractors taking advantage of any default by the paying party to issue adjudication notices requiring payment due to the absence of the requisite notifications. The Technology and Construction Court have reviewed this previously and come to the conclusion that failure to issue the correct notice is in effect strict liability to make payment.
His Honour Judge Peter Coulson in the recent case of Grove Developments has taken a different stance. He is unable to support the opinion of previous colleagues and has given binding authority that the absence of a payment notice is not fatal and a paying party will be entitled to commence a counter-adjudication seeking a “true value” of the invoice or account in question.
This is not a time for complacency and employers and main contractors must continue to comply with the payment regime.
However, in the event of default this case does allow a paying party to at least issue a counter-adjudication to nullify the effect of the inevitable decision of any first adjudicator being asked to order payment for failure to comply.
To discuss this or any other construction law issues please contact Blake Turner at firstname.lastname@example.org or on 020 7952 6214.