Home | News | Drax Power wins payment dispute over remedying work defects

Drax Power wins payment dispute over remedying work defects

July 28th 2021
 

Drax Power was entitled to withhold payment relating to one set of works to offset the cost of remedying defects in another set of works carried out by the same contractor.

Selina Gonzalez Trainee Solicitor reports on this recent case.

That was the decision of the High Court in a case involving Drax and Shepherd Construction Ltd.

The issue arose after Drax engaged Shepherd to design and build a facility (the Ecostore) to handle biomass fuel and transport it to the boiler distribution system. The contract was later varied to engage Shepherd to also design and build the boiler distribution system itself (the BDS works).

Clause 14.9 of the contract as varied related to the retention money. It appeared under the heading “In relation to [the Ecostore works]” and provided for Shepherd’s entitlement to apply for payment of the retention money in respect of those works and Drax’s entitlement to withhold the cost of any work still to be executed.

The next three clauses appeared under the heading “In relation to [the BDS works].” They dealt with the final milestone payment and established the date from which Shepherd could apply for payment of the retention money.

The clauses also said: “If any work remains to be executed under Clause 11 (Defects Liability) … the Employer (Drax) shall be entitled to withhold the estimated cost of this work until it has been executed and to deduct the same from amounts otherwise due to the Contractor (Shepherd) until such time as the work is completed”.

Drax paid the retention money relating to the Ecostore works. Shepherd then applied for payment of the retention money relating to the BDS works. Drax deducted sums from that payment in respect of the cost of remedying defects in the Ecostore works.

Shepherd said that the contract did not entitle Drax to deduct from the BDS works retention money sums relating to remedying defects in the Ecostore works.

The court found in favour of Drax.

It held that the contract entitled Drax to withhold from the sums due for the BDS works the estimated cost of any work remaining, regardless of whether that work related to the Ecostore works or the BDS works.

The most important factor in reaching that conclusion was the wording that referred to “any work”.

The absence of any express qualification limiting “any work” to the BDS works powerfully indicated that the reference was not limited to those works.

If you would like more information about the issues raised in this article or any aspect of contract law please contact Selina on 01228 516666 or click here to send her an email.

Share on Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email
We'll call you...
 
This website uses cookies
This site uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience. We use necessary cookies to make sure that our website works. We’d also like to set analytics cookies that help us make improvements by measuring how you use the site. By clicking “Allow All”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyse site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts.
These cookies are required for basic functionalities such as accessing secure areas of the website, remembering previous actions and facilitating the proper display of the website. Necessary cookies are often exempt from requiring user consent as they do not collect personal data and are crucial for the website to perform its core functions.
A “preferences” cookie is used to remember user preferences and settings on a website. These cookies enhance the user experience by allowing the website to remember choices such as language preferences, font size, layout customization, and other similar settings. Preference cookies are not strictly necessary for the basic functioning of the website but contribute to a more personalised and convenient browsing experience for users.
A “statistics” cookie typically refers to cookies that are used to collect anonymous data about how visitors interact with a website. These cookies help website owners understand how users navigate their site, which pages are most frequently visited, how long users spend on each page, and similar metrics. The data collected by statistics cookies is aggregated and anonymized, meaning it does not contain personally identifiable information (PII).
Marketing cookies are used to track user behaviour across websites, allowing advertisers to deliver targeted advertisements based on the user’s interests and preferences. These cookies collect data such as browsing history and interactions with ads to create user profiles. While essential for effective online advertising, obtaining user consent is crucial to comply with privacy regulations.