Vascroft (Contractors) Ltd v Seeboard Plc
Citation: 78 B.L.R. 132; 52 Con. L.R. 1
Nature of case:
A dispute as to the date of practical completion had been referred to an arbitrator, concerning the DOM/2 standard form. The arbitrator found that cl.14.2 of that form did not apply where the Seeboard had failed to give notice of practical completion on the sub-contract, and so practical completion was not deemed to have occurred under that provision. Vascroft appealed this decision, and contended that no leave to appeal was required because Seeboard had consented to the appeal by cl.38.7 of the DOM/2 form, as provided for by s.1(3)(a) of the Arbitration Act 1979.
The Court held that leave to appeal was not required, in that cl.38.7 fell within s.1(3)(a) of the 1979 Act. The appeal was allowed, with the Court holding that cl.14.2 did apply where Seeboard had not given notice of practical completion.
