Case No. HT-08-331

58.As a result, I find that ROK elected to treat the adjudicator's decision as binding and they are, therefore, precluded from approbating and reprobating the decision. In any event, in relation to the challenges to the enforcement of the decision made by ROK, I find that there was an agreement in writing, that the disputes fell within that one construction contract, that there were crystallised disputes, that the failure to comply with paragraph 7(2) of Part I of the scheme did not take the adjudication outside the scheme, that there was no breach of the rules of natural justice and the adjudicator did not answer the wrong question. Accordingly, I find that, despite the many grounds by which ROK has sought to challenge the adjudication and the adjudicator's decision, none of those grounds are sustainable and ROK has no real prospects of defending these proceedings under Part 24. PTB is therefore entitled to summary judgment and I shall hear submissions as to the precise sum, interest and costs.59.I conclude by thanking both counsel for their succinct written submissions and for the efficient way in which they developed those submissions on the many points that I have had to consider.