Pre-Action Protocol Exceptions

Pre-Action Protocol Exceptions

Pre-Action Protocol and Conduct: What Are The Exceptions? in relation to the Technology and Construction Court

[rtbs name=”technology-and-construction-court”]A claimant does not have to comply with the Construction and Engineering Pre-Action Protocol if his claim: (a) is to enforce the decision of an adjudicator; (b) is to seek an urgent declaration or injunction in relation to adjudication (whether ongoing or concluded); (c) includes a claim for interim injunctive relief; (d) will be the subject of a claim for summary judgment pursuant to Part 24 of the Civil Procedure Rules; or (e) relates to the same or substantially the same issues as have been the subject of a recent adjudication or some other formal alternative dispute resolution procedure; or (f) relates to a public procurement dispute. the Construction and Engineering Pre-Action Protocol does not contemplate an extended process and it should not be drawn out. Thus, the letter of claim should be concise and it is usually sufficient to explain the proposed claim(s), identifying key dates, so as to enable the potential defendant to understand and to investigate the allegations. Only essential documents need be supplied, and the period specified for a response should not be longer than one month without good reason. In particular, where a claim is brought by an litigant based outside the UK it will generally be appropriate to confine the steps to the time limits provided by the Construction and Engineering Pre-Action Protocol and, in many cases, to dispense with the meeting referred to in paragraph 5.1 of the Construction and Engineering Pre-Action Protocol. In any event, such a meeting is not mandatory and may be dispensed with if it would involve disproportionate time and cost or it is clear that it would be unlikely to serve any useful purpose. In addition, a claimant need not comply with any part of the Construction and Engineering Pre-Action Protocol if, by so doing, his claim may become time-barred under the Limitation Act 1980. In those circumstances, a claimant should commence proceedings without complying with the Construction and Engineering Pre-Action Protocol and must, at the same time, apply for directions as to the timetable and form of procedure to be adopted. The Technology and Construction Court may order a stay of those proceedings pending completion of the steps set out in the Construction and Engineering Pre-Action Protocol.


Posted

in

,

by

Tags:

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *