Erith Group is a British construction and civil engineering group specializing in site preparation, demolition, remediation, and infrastructure services. Founded in 1967 and headquartered in Erith, London, the group operates through multiple subsidiary companies providing comprehensive enabling works, plant services, waste management, and haulage across major UK infrastructure and commercial projects.
The group's principal operating company, Erith Contractors Limited, was fined £17.6 million in 2023 by the UK Competition and Markets Authority for participating in bid-rigging activities in the demolition sector.[3]
History
Erith Group traces its origins to 1967, when Tom Darsey founded a single-vehicle haulage business in Erith, London.[4] Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, the business expanded from local haulage into demolition and civil engineering services, gradually developing the multi-company structure that forms today's Erith Group.
In 2017, the Darsey family transferred ownership of the entire Erith Group into an Employee Ownership Trust. Under this structure, qualifying employees across all group companies receive annual bonuses and dividends, and the business is managed for the collective benefit of its workforce. The EOT model has been maintained as the group has continued to expand its operations and subsidiary companies.[5]
Group Companies
Erith Contractors Limited
Erith Contractors Limited is the principal operating company within Erith Group and its largest subsidiary. The company was formally incorporated as Erith Demolition and Construction Co. Limited on 15 March 1973,[6] changing its name to Erith Contractors Limited in 1987.[7]
Erith Contractors specializes in demolition, asbestos removal, land remediation, and civil engineering works for major infrastructure and commercial development projects across the UK. The company serves as the primary contracting entity for the group's largest and most complex projects.
Financial Performance
For the financial year ending 30 September 2024, Erith Contractors reported revenues of £243.1 million (up 13.8% from £213.7 million) and pre-tax profits of £9.0 million (up from £6.0 million the previous year).[8] The company's balance sheet showed net assets of £23.6 million and approximately £27 million in cash reserves.[9]
Erith Plant Services
Erith Plant Services, established in 2014, operates as the group's dedicated plant and equipment division.[10] The company manages the group's fleet of heavy machinery and specialized vehicles, valued at over £8.5 million, including excavators, crushers, recycling machinery, and heavy transport equipment.
Erith Plant Services provides equipment procurement, maintenance, and management services for projects across the Erith Group, as well as offering plant hire services to external clients. The division ensures the availability and reliability of specialized equipment required for large-scale demolition, earthworks, and civil engineering operations.
Incidents
Death of Liam McArdle
In September 2021 a 24‑year‑old worker, Liam McArdle, was fatally crushed by a demolition grab while working at Erith Plant Services Ltd’s workshop in Eastern Quarry (Swanscombe, Kent).[11] An HSE investigation found Erith Plant Services had “failed to ensure there was a safe method of work” when loading attachments onto excavators, including lack of driver training, poor vehicle/pedestrian segregation, and inadequate supervision.[12] In March 2024 Erith Plant Services Ltd pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 and was fined £175,000 (plus ~£37,800 costs) by Woolwich Crown Court.[13]
Anchor Bay Wharf roof-fall accident
In January 2015 two drivers from Erith Haulage Co. Ltd. undertook unscheduled roof‑cleaning work at their yard in Anchor Bay Wharf (Erith, Kent). One driver fell through an unprotected skylight 4.5 m to the floor, suffering serious injuries (skull fractures, broken arms, etc.).[14] The HSE prosecuted Erith Haulage for failing to properly plan or supervise work at height.[15] In March 2017 Erith Haulage pleaded guilty to breaching Regulation 4(1) of the Work at Height Regulations 2005 and was fined £215,000 (plus ~£10,600 costs).[16]
CMA investigation into Erith Contractors
In 2023 Erith Contractors was implicated in a UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigation of bid-rigging in the demolition and asbestos-removal sector. In March 2023 the CMA fined Erith £17.6 million for its role in colluding on contract tenders with other firms. (The CMA’s investigation, which covered five years of contracts in London and the South East, resulted in fines against Erith and several other companies.) Erith did not admit its involvement in the scandal and so did not have its fine reduced.[17] Notably, Erith reported in April 2025 that it had paid off the entire £17.6m fine ahead of schedule – completing repayment two and a half years earlier than originally planned. The company has stated that it resumed normal operations and returned to profitability following the settlement, and that the early repayment was enabled by a strong trading performance.[18]
Sewage spill in Wales
In late September 2023 Erith Contractors Ltd (a subsidiary of Erith Group) caused a pollution incident in Cardiff. A demolition crew demolishing a former HMRC building accidentally ruptured a main sewer line, discharging raw sewage into Llanishen Brook and Roath Park Lake. Natural Resources Wales (NRW) investigated after a public report and worked with Erith to contain the spill.[19] In June 2025 NRW announced that Erith Contractors had accepted responsibility and signed an enforcement undertaking. As part of that undertaking, Erith agreed to donate £150,000 to the South East Wales Rivers Trust to fund river conservation projects in the affected area.[20]
John Doyle Construction Ltd v Erith Contractors Ltd (2021)
John Doyle Construction Ltd (in liquidation) v Erith Contractors Ltd
Court
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Decided
October7,2021(2021-10-07)
Citation
[2021] EWCA Civ 1452; [2021] WLRD 516
Holding
An insolvent company is not entitled to summary judgment to enforce an adjudication award unless the insolvency set-off has been finally determined or "clear, evidenced and unequivocal" security is provided for the award and potential costs.
Construction Law, Adjudication, Insolvency, Summary Judgment, Set-off
John Doyle Construction Ltd (in liquidation) v Erith Contractors Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1452 is a Court of Appeal case on enforcing adjudication awards against an insolvent company. JDC was a subcontractor on the Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park project. JDC went into liquidation and disputed its final account with Erith: JDC claimed about £4 million was due, while Erith said JDC had already been overpaid by about £3 million.[21] After a five-month adjudication, the adjudicator awarded roughly £1.2 million to JDC. Erith challenged enforcement. At first instance (Fraser J, TCC), the court refused summary judgment enforcing the award because JDC had not provided adequate security against Erith’s counterclaims. JDC appealed.[22]
The Court of Appeal (Coulson LJ, Lewison LJ, Edis LJ) upheld the refusal. Coulson LJ held that a liquidated claimant must show any payment is safely ring-fenced. In particular, any offer of security must be “clear, evidenced and unequivocal”.[23] In Doyle v Erith, the proposed security (an insurance policy and a letter of credit) was held insufficient.[24] The Court emphasized that judges should not be expected to conjure security from vague suggestions; a claimant must make formal, unambiguous undertakings to protect any funds. In short, if a company in liquidation seeks to enforce an adjudication, it must be beyond doubt how the award will be ring-fenced against future claims.[25]
The judgment also (in obiter) dealt with the effect of insolvency set-off. Because an adjudicator’s decision is provisional, it cannot finally fix the net balance between mutual claims. Coulson LJ noted that if the paying party has an unresolved counterclaim or set-off, the adjudication award does not determine the true balance of what each owes.[26] On that basis, the Court held an insolvent claimant is generally not entitled to enforcement by summary judgment when a genuine cross-claim remains. Enforcement can only proceed if the net balance can be determined at once – for example, if the cross-claim is undisputed or can itself be decided immediately.[27] Otherwise, the Insolvency Rules (and set-off) prevail, and the liquidated party must pursue its net claim in full litigation.
The immediate outcome was that JDC’s appeal failed – it neither proved adequate security nor overcame Erith’s set-off. Coulson LJ remarked that the sort of security needed (essentially an indemnity and a ring-fenced escrow) would make summary enforcement a “futile gesture” for liquidators.[28] Commentators note that the Court effectively reaffirmed a “fundamental incompatibility” between the quick-pay adjudication regime and the insolvency set-off regime.[29] In practice, an insolvent claimant may now have to rely on full court proceedings to recover its net claim, even after “winning” an adjudication.
Major projects and operations
Old Oak Common station under construction in March 2022
Erith Contractors has worked on numerous major UK infrastructure and commercial projects, typically providing demolition, site clearance and remediation. Recent examples include:
Bean Road Underpass (Bluewater, Kent) – In January 2026 Erith won an £18.0m Kent County Council contract to build a new 75-metre underpass (the Bean RoadUnderpass) near the Bluewater Shopping Centre. This civil-engineering scheme will link Bluewater to the Ebbsfleet and Whitecliffe developments; preparatory site works began in early 2026.[30]
Cleveland Clinic London (Belgravia, London) – Erith handled the demolition and façade retention at 33 Grosvenor Place in Belgravia, where an existing office building is being converted into a healthcare facility for the Cleveland Clinic London hospital. This complex contract involved careful asbestos removal and deconstruction behind a large building wrap.[31]
HS2 Old Oak Common (London) – As part of the HS2 railway project, Erith was subcontracted (to CostainSkanska JV) to clear the old Great Western Railway maintenance sheds at the future Old Oak Common station site. Over four months in 2019 it demolished enormous brick sheds (formerly locomotive workshops) and removed 40,000 tonnes of concrete slab, recycling nearly all the material. The work was highlighted by HS2 Ltd as a major “early works” milestone enabling later station construction.[32]
Ebbsfleet Garden City (Kent) – Erith has been a long-term partner in the Ebbsfleet new-town development, based in Ebbsfleet for over a decade. It has undertaken extensive land remediation and road-infrastructure works to prepare housing sites in the Garden City area. A social-value report for Ebbsfleet notes Erith’s commitment to the area, including employing dozens of local staff and supporting apprenticeships.[33]
Other large projects (from Erith’s project portfolio) have included enabling works on London developments and tunnels, such as early-phase demolitions on the Thames Tideway and Silvertown Tunnel projects, and major building redevelopments in the South East.
↑India Fahy, Edward Coulson. "Demolished by the CMA - collusion in the demolition industry". JD Supra. Archived from the original on 2026-01-10. Retrieved 2026-01-07. On 23 March 2023 the UK Competition and Markets Authority ('CMA') issued an announcement that it has issued fines totalling nearly £60m to 10 construction firms for illegally colluding to rig bids for demolition and asbestos removal projects in both the public and private sectors. The largest fine of £17.5m was issued to Erith.
↑"Erith pays down bid-rigging fine over two years early". Construction Enquirer. Retrieved 2026-01-06. At year-end, headcount stood at 544, with 447 qualifying for the Employee Ownership Trust bonus scheme. Since its inception, back in 2017, the EOT has paid out over £5.3m to staff – including £540k in the latest financial year.
↑Butler, Rory (2025-04-09). "Robust revenue and profits for Erith". Construction Wave. Retrieved 2026-01-07. Turnover for the year ended 30 September 2024 increased 13.8 per cent to £243.1 million from £213.7 million the year prior, generating a pre-tax profit of £9 million, up from £6 million in FY2023.
↑Butler, Rory (2025-04-09). "Robust revenue and profits for Erith". Construction Wave. Retrieved 2026-01-06. At the year end, the family-run business had improved net assets and total equity of £23.6 million, up from £18.2 million the year before, with increased cash reserves too of £27 million.
↑"Construction firm fined £175k after worker fatally crushed". Kent Online. 2024-04-04. Retrieved 2026-01-10. The fatal crush happened at Erith Plant Services Limited's workshop in Ebbsfleet's Eastern Quarry in Watling Street, Swanscombe, the site of a major garden city homes development.
↑"Demolition grab fatality leads to £175k fine". www.theconstructionindex.co.uk. Retrieved 2026-01-10. A Health & Safety Executive (HSE) investigation into the incident found that Erith Plant Services had failed to ensure there was a safe method of work while loading and unloading excavators and attachments.
↑"Erith Plant Services fined £175,000 after worker crushed to death | Agg-Net". www.agg-net.com. 2024-04-05. Retrieved 2026-01-10. Erith Plant Services, who pleaded guilty to breaching Section 2(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, were fined £175,000 and ordered to pay £37,804 in costs at Woolwich Crown Court on 27 March 2024.
↑Efthmyiou, George (2017-02-03). "£215,000 Fine After Fall From Height". Shout Out Safety. Retrieved 2026-01-10. After some time cleaning, the driver noticed a section of roof left uncleaned and while walking along a section of the roof he fell through a skylight. He landed on a concrete floor 4.5 metres below. The fall caused the man to spend a month in hospital sustaining significant injuries to his skull with multiple facial fractures. He also suffered damage to bones in both arms which needed pins and plates.
↑"Erith pays down bid-rigging fine over two years early". Construction Enquirer. Retrieved 2026-01-07. Kent-based demolition specialist Erith has paid off its £17.6m bid-rigging fine two and a half years early after another strong trading performance.
↑Capel, Michael (2025-07-02). "Company donates £150,000 to local rivers trust after polluting a Cardiff river". Water Magazine. Retrieved 2026-01-10. A demolition crew had damaged a main sewer line, causing raw sewage to discharge into a tributary of Llanishen Brook, which ended up in Roath Park Lake. Working closely with staff from Erith Contractors Ltd and Dŵr Cymru Welsh Water, NRW officers ensured that the damaged sewer was repaired and the pollution contained later that same day.
↑Maris, Gatehouse Chambers-Michael (2022-02-16). "Insolvency and Adjudication in John Doyle Construction". Lexology. Retrieved 2026-01-06. Erith for £4 million they claimed to be due, and attempted to assign their claim to a litigation funder, Henderson & Jones ("HJ"). Erith denied the claim and submitted that JDC had already been paid out more than £3 million too much.
↑Maris, Gatehouse Chambers-Michael (2022-02-16). "Insolvency and Adjudication in John Doyle Construction". Lexology. Retrieved 2026-01-06. The adjudicator decided in JDC's favour, in the sum of around £1.2 million, and Erith immediately challenged the decision by way of a Notice of Dissatisfaction. JDC then submitted a letter before claim which tacitly recognised that, if Erith paid out the adjudication sum to JDC, the money could be distributed, and that little would be recovered if it transpired that the adjudicator had been wrong.
↑"Wayback Machine"(PDF). www.judiciary.uk. Archived from the original(PDF) on 2025-04-28. Retrieved 2026-01-06. In particular, any undertakings or security being offered by a claimant company in liquidation need to be clear, evidenced and unequivocal.
↑"Going for broke - The Court of Appeal decides the limits on insolvent party enforcement of adjudication awards | DLA Piper". www.dlapiper.com. Retrieved 2026-01-06. outstanding matters between the parties (whether under the same construction contract or not), and whether appropriate security is put forward to ensure the paying party can recover the sums paid, and their legal costs, in the event of a subsequent challenge to the adjudicator's decision. On the facts, Fraser J held that the security offered by John Doyle was inadequate, and declined summary enforcement of the adjudicator's decision on that basis.
↑"Wayback Machine"(PDF). www.judiciary.uk. Archived from the original(PDF) on 2025-04-28. Retrieved 2026-01-06. decision, notwithstanding its own liquidation, it needs to be unequivocal about any offer that it is making to ring-fence that money or otherwise protect it. Where there is a dispute about the sufficiency of the undertakings or security on offer, it must at least be beyond argument what has been offered and why.
↑"Going for broke - The Court of Appeal decides the limits on insolvent party enforcement of adjudication awards | DLA Piper". www.dlapiper.com. Retrieved 2026-01-06. The Court of Appeal went further however, and found that as an adjudication is necessarily provisional, an adjudicator's decision could not finally determine the net balance between the parties even where all relevant claims and cross-claims had been considered in the course of the adjudication. In a dispute such as between John Doyle and Erith, where both parties claimed they were owed money in relation to the final account, Erith had an on-going set off against the amount claimed by John Doyle because it was open to Erith to challenge the adjudicator's decision in final proceedings and assert its own full claims.
↑"Going for broke - The Court of Appeal decides the limits on insolvent party enforcement of adjudication awards | DLA Piper". www.dlapiper.com. Retrieved 2026-01-10. This finding carries substantial implications. While, following Bresco, insolvent parties have the right to adjudicate and obtain a decision on their claims, they will not be able to enforce that decision by summary judgment unless it is possible to show at a summary judgment application that the 'net balance' between the parties can be determined. This may be possible where there is no disputed cross claim, or where the disputed cross-claim can be decided or dismissed summarily, but where the final position between the parties remains subject to substantive further proceedings, an insolvent party will have difficulty obtaining judgment on the adjudicator's decision.
↑"Henderson & Jones | News & Insights: John Doyle Construction v Erith Contractors". www.hendersonandjones.com. Retrieved 2026-01-10. For many, it is therefore surprising that, despite Lord Briggs's findings in Bresco, the Court of Appeal (with the leading judgment again given by Coulson LJ) has today concluded in John Doyle Construction v Erith Contractors [2021] EWCA Civ 1542 that there remains a "fundamental incompatibility between the adjudication regime and the insolvency set-off regime" (paragraph 93).
↑Ebbsfleet Development Corporation. Ebbsfleet's Social Value Impact Report 2024/25: Maximising Positive Impact for Local Communities. Erith Contractors, based in Ebbsfleet for 11 years, have played a key role in land remediation and road infrastructure for housing. As a long-term regeneration partner, they are committed to local employment, with 75 staff from Dartford and Gravesham – 13% of their 577-strong workforce.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
£243.1 million (2024)