Monthly Archives: January 2010

REUTERS | Herwig Prammer
January 8, 2010

Ask the team: it’s snowing, so do I get an extension of time?

Contractors need to look carefully at extension of time and loss and expense clauses to see if snow and freezing temperatures entitle them to more time and money.

Adverse weather conditions (again)

Last year, in January and February 2009, parts of the UK suffered from heavy rainfall and flooding. At that time, we looked at whether a contractor could claim time and money under its building or engineering contract, as a result of bad weather. Despite the subsequent publication of Revision 2 2009 to the JCT Standard Building Contract and Design and Build Contract, the comments in that update still stand today. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Jason Lee
January 7, 2010

Time travel – adjudication under the amended Act

In December last year I was granted the unique opportunity to take part in an adjudication, which took place in 2014, sometime after the amendments to the Construction Act 1996 had come into force.

My expert witness, Gary Peters, relied on the “Fagin formula” for loss and expense, while the two main witnesses, Martin Potter and John Riches, traded equally incredible allegations concerning an alleged verbal agreement reached at the Builder’s Cleavage pub after a heavily disputed number of pints of beer. OK, it was only the Adjudication Society’s mock adjudication (organised by Hamish Lal and Emily Busby) and there was some exaggeration for dramatic effect. Continue reading →

REUTERS |
January 6, 2010

Pre-planning appointments: why bother?

Time is money on any construction project and a well drafted pre-planning appointment could save you both.

At the start of a construction project, legal formalities are generally not a priority for the parties, who are more likely to be focused on pre-commencement practicalities, such as selecting the right project team, creating a concept design, preparing a planning application and so on. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Mike Segar
January 4, 2010

Can a party terminate an agreement pending an adjudicator’s decision on whether termination is valid?

Adjudication was originally conceived as a quick and convenient means of resolving disputes during the life of a project. Increasingly, adjudication has become popular as a means of resolving disputes after practical completion.

But what about disputes concerning the termination of the contract itself? Continue reading →

REUTERS | Christian Charisius
January 4, 2010

Not slipping-up on the slip rule

For many months now, we have all been discussing the changes the amendments to the Construction Act 1996 will have on various aspects of adjudication. Most commentators have focused on three things: an end to contract conditions that require one party to pay for the adjudication, regardless of the outcome; the adjudicator’s ability to direct payment of his fees; and the “in writing” rule for construction contracts being a thing of the past. By comparison, the slip rule changes have occupied few column inches and appear to have “slipped by” almost unnoticed. No doubt this is, in part, because there is little to criticise in these proposed changes. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Beawiharta
January 1, 2010

Say hello to the “twenty tens”, wave goodbye to the “noughties”

As TS Eliot wrote (in Little Gidding):

“For last year’s words belong to last year’s language and next year’s words await another voice. And to make an end is to make a beginning.”

As one year ends, so another year (and another decade) begins. PLC Construction has been reflecting on events in 2009 and looking forward to 2010. Continue reading →

Share this post on: