The employers were Mr Legg and Ms Carver, the owners of a house at 188a Sutherland Avenue, Maida Vale, London. An architect prepared drawings and a specification for the proposed refurbishment works to the property. The employers were residential occupiers for the purposes of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. Nonetheless, they entered into a contract by signing the JCT Agreement for Minor Building Works, 1998 Edition, incorporating amendments MW1 – 11, which included supplemental condition D in respect of adjudication. During the course of the work Mr Legg dispensed with the architect's services, and appointed a contract administrator. The contract administrator "informally certified" valuation 10 and 11 by signing the valuation submitted by the contractor. On 20 December 2002 Mr Legg made it clear that he did not intend to pay any further sums to the builder. The builder then suspended work, and served a Notice of Dispute seeking an 11-week extension of time and payment of outstanding sums. The RIBA appointed an adjudicator, who decided that the employers should pay the contractor £85,873.59.

Case details 4 July 2003, TCC, Cardiff District Registry, HHJ Moseley QC
The employers sought to undermine the adjudicator's decision by claiming that the dispute resolution clause referring matters to adjudication within the Minor Works Contract was unfair because it caused a significant imbalance in the terms between the parties to the detriment of the employer pursuant to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999. They also contended that there was no dispute capable of being referred to adjudication, and that the notice attempted to refer three disputes and was therefore void. Set-off was sought against the decision in respect of direct payments to a joiner, and finally they sought a stay because of the financial state of the contractor.