Lessons from Tenderbids Ltd v Electrical Waste Management Ltd – No ‘Pay-Now, Argue Later’! Part 1

Tenderbids Ltd (t/a Bastion) v Electrical Waste Management Ltd is a 2025 decision of the Irish High Court that has become very significant in construction law, particularly in relation to statutory adjudication under the Construction Contracts Act 2013 (CCA 2013).

Below is a clear, plain English explanation of what the case is, why it matters, and what the court decided.

What was the case about?

The case concerned a payment dispute on a construction project.

• Tenderbids Ltd (trading as Bastion) was the main contractor
• Electrical Waste Management Ltd (EWM) was the employer
• The project involved construction of a waste metal facility

When a payment dispute arose, Tenderbids tried to use the statutory adjudication process under the Construction Contracts Act 2013, which is designed to resolve construction payment disputes quickly on a “pay now, argue later” basis.

What is adjudication under the Construction Contracts Act?

Under the CCA 2013:

• A party can refer a payment dispute to adjudication at any time
• The process starts by serving a Notice of Intention to Refer the dispute
• An adjudicator then decides the dispute quickly (usually within weeks)
• Courts usually enforce adjudicators’ decisions, even if they may later be challenged in arbitration or litigation

Before this case, Irish courts had never refused to enforce a statutory adjudicator’s decision for a defect like this. 

What went wrong in Tenderbids v EWM?

The problem was how the Notice of Intention was served.

The construction contract explicitly stated:

• All notices under the Construction Contracts Act must be served by registered post
• Only payment claim notices could be served by email

This was fully permitted under section 10 of the CCA 2013, which allows parties to agree their own notice procedures.

What Tenderbids did

• Tenderbids sent the Notice of Intention by email
• It had email delivery receipts and “email opened” confirmations
• EWM did not participate in the adjudication
• The adjudicator awarded Tenderbids €1.53 million

Tenderbids then applied to the High Court to enforce the adjudicator’s decision.

The High Court’s decision

The key finding

The High Court (Simons J) refused to enforce the adjudicator’s decision.

The Court held that:

• The parties had expressly agreed that notices must be served by registered post
• That agreement must be respected
• The email service of the Notice of Intention was invalid
• Because the Notice was invalid, the adjudicator had no jurisdiction
• The adjudicator’s decision was therefore a “nullity” and unenforceable.

This was the first time an Irish court refused enforcement of a statutory adjudicator’s decision under the CCA 2013.

Why is the case so important?

(1) Strict compliance with notice provisions

The judgment confirms that:

• Notice requirements under a construction contract are not technicalities
• If a contract says “registered post”, email is not good enough
• Even actual knowledge of the notice does not cure defective service

The Court rejected any idea of “implied waiver” simply because the parties usually communicated by email.

(2) Adjudicators’ jurisdiction can be lost easily

The case demonstrates that:

• Jurisdiction depends on strict compliance with the gateway requirement (the Notice of Intention)
• If service is defective, everything that follows collapses
• A responding party can ignore the adjudication and later defeat enforcement

This is a major warning to referring parties.

(3) Court support for adjudication is strong – but not unconditional

The judgment did not weaken Ireland’s adjudication regime.

Instead, the Court emphasised:

• The CCA 2013 is pro adjudication
• But it also respects party autonomy
• Courts cannot override express contractual notice agreements

In short: fast justice still needs correct paperwork. Read the Contract terms for notifying the other party.

If you have any questions about contract claims, please do not hesitate to contact us at info@constructiondisputes.ie.

Legal Disclaimer 
The information provided on this blog is for general informational purposes only. All content is provided in good faith; however, we make no representation or warranty of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability, or completeness of any information on the site. Under no circumstance shall we have any liability to you for any loss or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of the site or reliance on any information provided on the site. Your use of the site and your reliance on any information on the site is solely at your own risk. This blog may contain links to other websites or content belonging to or originating from third parties. Such external links are not investigated, monitored, or checked for accuracy, adequacy, validity, reliability, availability, or completeness by us. The views and opinions expressed on this blog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any other agency, organization, employer, or company. We reserve the right to change or update this disclaimer at any time without notice.