Following last year’s consultation, Huw Irranca-Davies MP, the Minister for the Natural and Marine Environment, Wildlife and Rural Affairs, has announced that a biological control will be introduced in the UK to try and limit the spread of Japanese Knotweed.
The Minister described the problems associated with Japanese Knotweed as “massive”, costing the economy in the region of £150 million a year to deal with it. Continue reading
We have recently had two TCC judgments where the court has appeared to be sympathetic to the difficulties that adjudicators face with late submissions in adjudication.
In both cases, the responding party alleged that the adjudicator had breached the rules of natural justice by either ignoring or not taking sufficient notice of its submissions. In both cases, the court rejected the allegation. Continue reading
Trying to understand what the words in a contract mean is what we do every day. Lord Goff said that:
“In point of fact, if not the meat and drink, then at least the staple diet, of the Commercial Court can be summed up in one word – ‘construction’. Commercial lawyers, Solicitors, Barristers and Judges spend a very substantial part of their time interpreting contracts.” (Commercial Contracts and the Commercial Court (1984) L.M.C.L.Q. 382) Continue reading
The Government’s anti-blacklisting Regulations came into force on 2 March, but will they stop blacklisting?
The problem
In March 2009, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) uncovered a database containing the details of 3,213 construction workers, which was used by over 40 construction companies to vet individuals for employment. The database effectively acted as a blacklist of the individuals who appeared on it. Continue reading
The keenness of responding parties (and sometimes referring parties) to raise jurisdictional challenges about every little (and big) thing is, perhaps, an understandable part of adjudication. It often seems as though parties raise these challenges regardless of whether they believe the challenge has any merit, and irrespective of the stage that the adjudication has reached. Some challenges are simply wide ranging general reservations, others are concerned with more specific grounds. Continue reading
The first thing to remember is don’t Google it! But don’t panic either, it’s not as bad as it sounds. “Hot tubbing” or “concurrent evidence”, as it is less scarily known, is a method of giving evidence where both experts (or witnesses of fact) sit in the box together and the tribunal chairs a discussion between them.
The format differs from case to case, but the judge or arbitrator will ask questions as part of the discussion and counsel for either side may join in. The parties can also suggest questions for the tribunal to ask. Continue reading
