He quotes the judge in the case as saying, "I have found this case difficult". In fact, she only said that she found a particular aspect of it difficult, which involved applying a test to determine whether a dispute existed when the adjudication started. Mr B describes the test as when "the process of discussion or negotiation ended and is there now something to be decided". In fact as Justin Mort (Orange's counsel) pointed out in Building (20 June, page 54) the courts have applied another test, which the judge herself applied. This can be summarised as: "Has a claim been made, but not admitted?" Given the judge's application of this test, there is no basis for Mr B's suspicion that she was not pleased with the result (which he unfairly suggests favours an "ambusher").
In reality this claim was about procrastination rather than ambush. It took Orange about a year to recover the money due to it after its contract was wrongfully repudiated. If Mr B's views were correct, despite the adjudicator deciding Orange's claim on the merits, the decision would be unenforceable and Orange would have nothing. Christmas all year round for ABB, perhaps, but for Orange a kick in the Caucasus.
Rupert Choat, CMS Cameron McKenna, London.