Hackwood engaged Areen to carry out refurbishment works. Areen commenced the work under a Letter of Intent which referred to the JCT contract with Contractor’s Design. Final contract terms were never agreed although the parties had valued the works, dealt with variations and extension of time requests on the basis that the JCT contract terms applied. Areen referred a dispute regarding its extension of time entitlement to adjudication and contended that the terms of the JCT contract had been incorporated into the contract. The Adjudicator disagreed and decided that Areen was not entitled to any extension of time. Areen therefore gave notice of an arbitration and applied for the appointment of an arbitrator.

The Judge held that the letter of intent incorporated the terms of the JCT contract into the interim contract apart from those terms that were inconsistent with the terms of the letter. As such, Hackwood was a party to an arbitration agreement. Although the parties had not agreed which of the options set out in the Appendix to the JCT were to apply, he considered that where the JCT Appendix specifies a choice, and where none of the options is selected, the choice will still apply. Failure to agree certain terms did not mean that the JCT contract was void for uncertainty.