Makers were carrying out refurbishment work to flats in Northampton. They engaged All In One under a subcontract dated 22 November 2004. In July 2005 Makers issued a notice of determination on the basis of lack of supervision or insufficient labour on site. All In One claimed that the contract had been repudiated by Makers and submitted a claim. The claim was referred to adjudication and the adjudicator decided that All In One should be paid a sum of money.

Makers sought to challenge the payment on the basis that a dispute had not crystallised at the time that the notice of adjudication was issued. Further, the contract contemplated a two month period for the completion of the final account by Makers, and that time had not passed at the date of the issue of the notice.

Allegations of procedural unfairness and breaches of natural justice were raised in connection with a particular confirmation of verbal instructions. Makers' quantity surveyor gave a sworn statement that he had not signed a specific CVI and that All In One were not on site on that particular day. The adjudicator needed to decide whether the signature on the CVI was a forgery. The adjudicator wished to receive direct evidence from All In One. Shortly after this, the quantity surveyor's sworn statement was purported to be retracted. The adjudicator then received an unsigned statement that the quantity surveyor only produced the statement because his employers had threatened to make him redundant.