Highlighted that the court has jurisdiction to grant an injunction in an on-going adjudication, particularly where one party is no longer trading (Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (In Liquidation) v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 27), but would do so rarely and only in very clear-cut cases. (In Bresco, Coulson LJ had held that there is a basic incompatibility between adjudication and the insolvency regimes and, on the facts, it was appropriate to restrain the adjudication.)

Rejected the argument that, because of the COVID-19 lockdown, there would be a breach of the rules of natural justice if the adjudication was allowed to continue.

Acknowledged that there might be circumstances where an injunction may be appropriate (for example where the adjudicator had indicated they would only hear from one party), but here the threshold had not been met. The contractor's solicitor may have been self-isolating, but no explanation had been given as to why papers could not be transported or scanned over to the solicitor or anyone else instructed. Also, the lack of time to obtain evidence was nothing to do with the lockdown, but rather a failure to contact the contractor's former managing director and former project manager. The home-owner's offer of an extension of time to the adjudication process could have ameliorated any issues with witnesses and evidence. There was also no right for the parties to attend a site visit. This was something the adjudicator could do on his own and the contractor could make a list of specific matters for the adjudicator's attention beforehand.