Mentmore and the other Claimants are Jersey-registered companies. Packman Lucas was engaged to provide engineering services in relation to three projects. Work on the projects was suspended because of planning difficulties.

Packman Lucas commenced adjudication proceedings against Mentmore for outstanding fees. The adjudicator found in Packman Lucas’s favour; Mentmore failed to pay. Packman Lucas issued and served proceedings out of the jurisdiction to enforce the decisions. Judgment was entered in Packman Lucas’s favour, but Mentmore still did not pay. Packman Lucas then applied for interim charging orders.

One day prior to the charging orders becoming final, Mentmore issued proceedings seeking declarations of the amount due to Packman Lucas. An application to consolidate and stay the proceedings was successful due to Mentmore’s unreasonable and oppressive behaviour and some element of bad faith in Mentmore pursuing the proceedings without first honouring the adjudicator’s decisions.

Subsequently, Mentmore commenced adjudications for alleged overpayments to Packman Lucas. Packman Lucas applied for an injunction restraining the claimants from taking any further steps in the adjudications.

The judge held that there is no reason why a referral to adjudication that is unreasonable or oppressive should not be restrained by the same principles as those that operate if the claim were brought by way of litigation. He stated:

“…the unreasonable pursuit of a claim by way of adjudication may be more oppressive because the respondent, if successful, will be unable to recover his costs of resisting the claim.”

There was no difference in principle between the approach to be taken when considering whether court proceedings should be stayed on the grounds of unreasonable and oppressive behaviour, and the approach to be taken in an injunction application like this.

The injunctions were granted because the current referrals were another attempt to avoid the machinery of the HGCRA; to continue the adjudication proceedings would subject Packman Lucas to further oppressive and unreasonable behaviour. Other remedies – such as charging orders – would have been inappropriate.