My blog on what to do if a party seeks to rely on an earlier adjudicator’s decision on an unrelated project reminded me of another relatively common issue: what should an adjudicator do when one party includes without prejudice material in its submissions and the other party objects? Continue reading
The Government has announced that it is planning a tower crane register. This follows the Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) similar announcement earlier this year (see Building). Continue reading
Persistent late payment or non-payment of invoices may constitute a repudiatory breach of contract in some situations, but not in others. It is not always easy to spot the difference. In the current economic climate, this has become a common problem. Employers are reluctant to make payments to contractors who are on the brink of insolvency, especially as they are likely to be unsecured creditors in that insolvency. What can or should an employer do in these difficult circumstances?
The new Practice Direction on pre-action conduct comes into force today, 6 April 2009.
Construction and engineering disputes will be affected by the new Practice Direction, which will replace the current Practice Direction on Pre-action Protocols. Continue reading
I recently wrote about being an adjudicator at a mock adjudication hosted by Collyer Bristow. The dispute was between a contractor, Q (the referring party) and the employer, L (the responding party). Q claimed L owed it £400,000, which L denied.
This post looks at the allegation of bias, that is: was there a risk of bias because of an alleged relationship between the adjudicator and Mr Jones, an employee of the referring party? (Last time I dealt with the no contract point.) Continue reading
The long-running Wembley litigation battle (Multiplex v Cleveland Bridge) is destined not to go away. As Construction News reported today, the Court of Appeal has given both parties permission to appeal the decision of Mr Justice Jackson, handed down at the end of September last year. (Jackson J had refused both parties’ applications for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal.) Continue reading
