CASE IN BRIEF Body Corporate 200012 v Keene & Ors [2017] NZHC 2953 Sarah Redding The High Court has denied an attempt to use judicial review to strategically delay or avoid payment of an adjudication award under the ‘pay now, argue later’ policy behind the Construction Contracts Act 2002 (‘CCA’). Background In 2013, Body Corporate 200012 (‘BC12’), the Body Corporate for a large townhouse development in Auckland, entered into a construction contract with Naylor Love for the remediation of leaky building defects. Multiple disputes arose between the parties which resulted in two adjudications. Current disputes following the adjudications have been referred to arbitration. In the first adjudication, various claims by Naylor Love were upheld totaling over $3.2 million. Claims totaling a further $588,000 were upheld in a second adjudication. Pursuant to the CCA, an adjudicator’s determination is binding on the parties, and any money awarded must be paid even if the dispute is to be determined finally in another forum. Despite this, BC12 continued to dispute its liability to pay the determined sums (pending the outcome of the arbitration) and made no payment of the amounts determined in the adjudications to Naylor Love. As a result, Naylor Love successfully applied to enter the determination of the first adjudication as a judgment of the District Court for the purpose of enforcement against BC12. BC12 attempted to dodge the ‘pay now, argue later’ policy of the CCA by applying for judicial review of the two adjudication determinations, and appealing the decision to enter the first determination as a District Court judgment. BC12 was clear that its primary objective in applying for judicial review was to avoid paying Naylor Love, pending the outcome of the arbitration.