Building contract – Dispute. The Technology and Construction Court held that no timeous payment notice or pay less notice had been served by the claimant, in circumstances where it had sub-contracted the defendant to carry out construction work and where there were two conflicting provisions purporting to govern that work. In so holding, the court held that the applicable provisions were those contained in 'Appendix 10' of the contract, but that the schedule to Appendix 10 did not comply with the Housing, Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. Further, it held that there had been an obvious error in the payment notice date. Accordingly, the defendant's counterclaim for payment arising out of the claimant's failure to serve a timeous notice was allowed.