SCA 190/2016
This case involved equipment which belonged to a subcontractor in a construction project. The contract had been terminated and the main contractor was put into liquidation, A key issue was whether equipment which it was claimed belonged to the subcontractor could be included in the liquidation before an arbitration ruling had concluded.
Background
A company made a request to the court. They requested the court prevent a liquidator or any other party from seizing any of the disputed equipment until an arbitration process was finished. The company said that they had worked as a sub-contractor in a project with a company and the Ministry of the Transportation. The ministry terminated the contract and the company was being liquidated. They said that their equipment were included in the liquidation process.
The court ruled that the parties should not take any actions on the equipment.
The ministry and the company made a plea to the court.
The court dismissed the appealed ruling and dismissed the request made by the company.
The company appealed the ruling before the supreme court. They said in her grounds of appeal that the appealed ruling had s erred in the application of law.