Monthly Archives: August 2009

REUTERS | Jitendra Prakash

The question

What do you do if a professional consultant (such as an architect) changes its status, for example, if it converts from a partnership to a limited liability partnership (LLP), after its formal appointment, but before it is asked to provide collateral warranties? Who do you ask to provide the warranty, the old entity or the new entity? If the new entity, what safeguards do you insist upon? Continue reading

REUTERS | Beawiharta

The principle that, even if the adjudicator makes an error of law or fact, the decision will be enforced, is well established. Equally, parties are familiar with the slip rule that allows the adjudicator to correct mistakes after the decision has been sent out. But what happens when the adjudicator’s choice of language makes the decision vague or ambiguous? Continue reading

REUTERS | Christian Charisius

There is no doubt that construction adjudication has become much more technical since its introduction in 1998. Those experienced in adjudication will be familiar with the nuances of pre-adjudication tactics, jurisdictional challenges, the best ways of getting time extensions and so on. Once an adjudication starts it goes at such speed that decisions regarding procedure, challenges, submissions and the like have to be made quickly. Enormous submissions are sometimes prepared in a timescale that would be unimaginable in arbitration or litigation.

Continue reading

REUTERS | Alex Domanski

Last week, I looked at how a retention of title (RoT) clause can catch a contractor out, even if it complies with its building contract. This week, I want to look at this issue from the point of view of the supplier.

I Googled “RoT” and it is (we are assured) used as a reference to “Right on Time”, in which the Red Hot Chili Peppers told us that “it’s time to get on top of this“, so here we go… Continue reading

REUTERS | Kim Hong-Ji

Earlier this summer, we reported on the pilot of Jackson LJ’s “cost management” concept in Birmingham’s Technology and Construction Court (TCC) and Mercantile Court. The pilot is part of the major review of the civil litigation costs system being undertaken by Jackson LJ. Continue reading

Share this post on: