Mek Mesfin

Mek has a wide range of experience of construction disputes and is familiar with the main contract forms including JCT, NEC, FIDIC, IChemE, LOGIC and RIBA forms. He has a wide range of experience (both as sole counsel and as part of a team) in litigation, arbitration and in heavy adjudications.

Mek is frequently instructed prior to and following adjudication proceedings, whether to provide advice on merits or strategy, and to pursue or resist the enforcement of Adjudicators’ decisions. He also regularly sits as an Adjudicator and is on the TECBAR and CPA nominating Panels.

Featured Construction & Engineering cases

FK Construction v ISG – These claims included a number of disputes across two projects, in relation to which the parties engaged in several adjudications and multiple sets of Court proceedings. Mek was instructed (led by Alex Hickey KC) for the sub-contractor. The wide range of matters in dispute include the interpretation of notice provisions and notice documentation, contractual and common law termination, delay and disruption, the provisions of the 1996 Construction Act, the interaction between Part 8 and enforcement proceedings, setting off against adjudicator’s decisions, natural justice and jurisdictional arguments.

ISG v FK [2023] EWHC 2012 (TCC): Leading decision on the availability of restitution of sums paid under an adjudicator’s decision that is later found by a Court to have been wrong (considering the Supreme Court’s decision in Aspect v Higgins).

ISG v FK [2023] EWHC 1718 (TCC): Leading decision on default payee notices under s.110B(4) of the Construction Act.

FK v ISG [2023] EWHC 1042 (TCC): Leading decision on the ability to set-off adjudicators decisions.

Building Safety Act and fire safety disputes: Mek represents leaseholders, landlords, developers, professionals and other interested parties in matters involving claims introduced by the Building Safety Act 2022. This includes seeking and defending Building Liability Orders, Remediation Orders and Remediation Contribution orders and claims against building product manufacturers. He is regularly instructed in the TCC and in the FTT. By way of example, was instructed in the proceedings in relation to Vista Tower, the first action brought under the Building Safety Act 2022 by MHCLG (led by Ben Pilling KC) and the Grenfell Tower civil litigation (led by Sean Brannigan KC).

Representing the insurers of contractor in a c.£30m claim proceedings brought by the corporate owner of a care home against the contractor, its insurers, the architect and structural engineer in relation to alleged structural, architectural and fire safety defects (led by Rachel Ansell KC).

BAE Systems v Ardmore (1) DMA (2) – Mek is instructed, with James Leabeater KC, for the defendant architect in this substantial cladding case in relation to a hotel in central London. 3-week trial in July 2025.

Management Company v Project Team – Mek is instructed, with James Leabeater KC, for the leaseholders of a high-end high-rise block of apartments in central London bringing claims against members of the project team in relation to defective glass heat-soaked glass which has shattered. Interesting issues include limitation, the extent of appropriate remedial works.

International investment fund v Main Contractor – Mek is instructed, with Alexander Nissen KC, on a c.£20m cladding dispute about a large development in central London. The issues include interesting arguments about the scope of duty of care in tort and the Building Safety Act 2022’s extension of the limitation period under the Defective Premises Act 1972.

International Energy Company v City Council – Mek is instructed, with Claire Packman KC, on two major an on-going disputes in relation to (i) allegations of extensive defective works including fire stopping issues and (ii) the completion / commissioning of the works under a PFI contract for the design and installation of a heating system across 200+ local authority properties.

Kier Construction v Alumet (1) and OEL (2) – Mek is instructed, with Claire Packman KC, for the defendant architect in this significant cladding claim. Issues include the interaction between an “absolute” obligation and an obligation to use reasonable skill and care, the scope of the architect’s appointment, reasonable reliance upon specialist consultants and contractors and the extent of a designer’s obligation to review its design.

Manchester Metropolitan University v Sir Robert McAlpine (1) Toshiba Carrier (2) – Mek is instructed in the defence of a claim following an explosion of a large chiller forming part of an air conditioning system. The claim raises issues including the scope of a designer’s duty, the appropriateness of warnings given by a designer and whether such warnings amounted to a break in the chain of causation.

Representing a building contractor in relation to the development of commercial bakery premises (with Jennie Gillies).

Mek was instructed as sole counsel in a series of 18 separate adjudications brought by a contractor against a well-known London hospital within a period of 3 months. The combined value of the dispute were several million pounds. The legal issues raised included the formation and terms of the contract, the alleged incorporation of documents into the contract, allegedly non-contractual instructions, delays and extensions of time, condition precedents, the validity of payment notices, alleged defects, claims for loss and expense, the categorisation and valuation of variations, the date and validity of the certification of practical completion and the valuation of the final account.

Covid-19: Mek is advising on contractual issues and generally in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic. In particular, matters he has and continues to advise on include the performance of obligations, frustration, force majeure under a standard form contract, repudiatory breach of contract and termination, as well as advising on issues of strategy and reacting to non-binding government guidance.

Advising on a claim against utilities provider in relation to it causing significant delays and costs caused to a £multi-million refurbishment of a large London hospital.

Instructed as sole counsel for two defendants, a developer and contractor, in relation to a claim brought by 9 claimants for alleged defects in a residential project. The issues range from contractual interpretation of leases and building contracts, the application of the DPA 1972, and many technical issues in relation to defects.

Instructed on this £multi-million, multi-party matter relating to defective “Grenfell” type cladding at a Hilton Hotel at Gatwick Airport. The case raises significant issues of causation, expert evidence and Approved Document B.

ICCT Ltd v Sylvein Pinto [2019] EWHC 2134 (TCC) (Waksman J; London TCC): Mek was successful in enforcing an adjudicator’s decision; this case raised a plethora of issues relating to natural justice and jurisdiction, the most important of which was how a party/parties may provide an adjudicator with ‘ad hoc’ jurisdiction in the context of the residential occupier carve out at s.106 of the Construction Act.

Protostar v 203 Willesden Lane LLP [2019] HT-2019-000084 (London TCC; before Alexander Nissen KC): Successfully obtained the enforcement of an adjudicator’s decision in the sum of c.£250,000 and indemnity costs.

Tolent Construction Ltd v Benchmark Leisure Limited [2018] (Leeds TCC; HHJ Raeside KC): Successfully obtaining summary judgment for the enforcement of a c.£200k Adjudicator’s decision. The Court considered whether the dispute arose from a separate agreement or a variation to the original contract.

Aifos Properties Ltd v GHM Construction Ltd (London TCC; Sir Antony Edwards-Stuart): Obtained summary judgment for the enforcement of an Adjudicator’s decision and indemnity costs; involved issues of jurisdiction, natural justice and allegations of fraud and other impropriety.

Instructed to defend an Approved Inspector in a large multi-party claim. The matter had several hard fought hearings before HHJ Klein and HHJ Davis-White.

Significant adjudication relating to matters of practical completion on a c.£8m project.

Ongoing adjudication relating to notifications (conditions precedent) and alleged delay under an NEC3 contract.

Acting for engineers in a multi-million pound claim arising from a private development that appeared on the “Grand Designs” programme and is alleged to require significant remedial works. The claim involves difficult questions of scope of duty, technical evidence and quantification arise, along with the unique feature of the building having its own television programme about it.