The decision in High Tech Construction Ltd v WLP Trading & Marketing Ltd [2025] EWHC 3209 (TCC) is not just a technical judgment about freezing orders. It is a clear and practical warning to developers, employers and contractors about how conduct surrounding payment disputes and adjudication will be scrutinised if matters escalate to court.
Payment behaviour under the spotlight
One of the most striking features of the case was the employer’s approach to payment. Repeated assurances were given that funds would be released, followed by delays and shifting explanations involving banks, councils and temporary cashflow difficulties. Defect allegations only emerged much later.
The court treated this pattern as highly relevant when assessing whether there was a real risk that assets might be dissipated. The key message is straightforward: if payment is genuinely disputed, it should be addressed promptly, clearly and with evidence. Drifting responses, repeated promises to pay and implausible explanations will undermine credibility.
Defects are not a shield without evidence
The judgment also reinforces how weak unparticularised defect allegations can be. In this case, the employer asserted defects but failed to provide detailed particulars, quantify losses or give any independent expert evidence. At the same time, it maintained that the building was effectively ready for occupation.
That inconsistency undermined the credibility of the defence. Employers should take note that defects cannot be used as a blanket justification for withholding payment without proper substance. Contractors, equally, should recognise that courts will scrutinise defect arguments carefully and will see through generic assertions unsupported by evidence.
Financial transparency matters
Another important lesson concerns transparency around finances and assets. Once freezing relief is sought or granted, full and frank disclosure is not optionalAs highlighted in this case, vague descriptions of loans, unexplained changes in figures, missing bank information and shifting explanations about how funds had been used all counted heavily against the employer.
The court was clear that a sole director of a development company should be able to explain, quickly and accurately, where money has gone.
Corporate restructuring during disputes
The case also highlights the risks associated with restructuring or moving assets during live disputes. The creation of a new company after the dispute had arisen, coupled with uncertainty about which entity would ultimately hold or lease the development, raised legitimate concerns for the court.
Even though no transfer had yet occurred, the court was willing to infer a real risk of dissipation based on the overall picture.
Freezing orders remain a real tool
For contractors, the judgment is a reminder that freezing orders remain available where there is compelling evidence that an adjudication award may not be honoured. Such orders are not granted lightly and are not common, but where there is a combination of non-payment, evasive conduct, unexplained financial movements and inadequate disclosure, the court will act to preserve assets.
A pragmatic judicial approach
Ultimately, the decision underlines the court’s pragmatic approach. No single factor was decisive on its own, but taken together the evidence painted a picture that justified intervention. The court looked at the overall reality rather than isolated arguments.
There is also a broader point about how disputes are handled, how payment issues are communicated, how finances are managed and how transparent parties are which can all determine whether a dispute remains commercial or escalates into restrictive court orders.
Conclusion
High Tech Construction v WLP Trading & Marketing is not just a case about freezing orders. It is a reminder of the importance of credibility, transparency and accountability in construction payment disputes.
How CCC can help
CCC supports contractors and subcontractors in protecting cash flow and resolving disputes efficiently, with a focus on practical outcomes. We can help you:
- Prepare robust payment applications and supporting records that stand up to scrutiny.
- Keep disputes focused on the real issues and present evidence clearly, including where defects are alleged.
- Run adjudications efficiently and in a way that supports enforcement if payment is not made.
- Assess enforcement options and work with legal teams on recovery strategy where there is a genuine risk assets may be moved beyond reach.
If you are facing a dispute or having difficulty in obtaining payment, we can help you identify the quickest, most commercial route to recovery.
