This case concerns whether in adjudication proceedings an adjudicator should disclose that they are acting as adjudicator in other matters involving one of the parties before them. The sub-contractor obtained an adjudication award in its favour. The works related to a baggage handling system in Gatwick Airport. There had been 4 adjudications relating to the system between different parties and the same adjudicator had acted in all 4 adjudications. The main contractor resisted enforcement of the decision on the basis it had been unaware of the parallel adjudications between the sub-contractor and the sub-sub-contractor, in which it was said that the sub-contractor had advanced a factually inconsistent position with that which it advanced in the adjudication it now sought to enforce. The main contractor alleged that there was a case of apparent bias in failing to disclose his involvement in the other dispute and a breach of natural justice. The Court found that the sub-contractor’s positions had been factually inconsistent – it alleged that the works had been completed at different times in different adjudications. The adjudicator should have disclosed that he was acting as adjudicator in another matter involving the sub-contractor, regardless of whether it was on the same project or not. There was an objective risk of bias if the involvement was not disclosed. There was also a breach of natural justice in keeping from the main contractor the factually inconsistent cases advanced by the sub-contractor. The application to enforce the adjudicator’s decision was therefore refused.