Monthly Archives: November 2010

REUTERS | Mike Segar

Samuel Taylor Coleridge:

“The one red leaf, the last of its clan, that dances as often as dance it can,
Hanging so light, and hanging so high, on the topmost twig that looks up at the sky.”

The last of the autumn leaves are falling and winter is well and truly here. It seems that it isn’t only the birds that have migrated and wildlife that is heading into hibernation; at the time of writing, we have had only one judgment from the TCC this month. That is not to say that all the courts have been quiet. We have reported on the new exception to the without prejudice rule; estoppel and mistake; incorporating terms into a contract; and the Scottish court’s judgments on reasonable endeavours and reasons in an adjudicator’s decision (and clause 38 of the TeCSA rules). Continue reading

REUTERS | Beawiharta

Adjudicating 24/7

Nowadays, it is common to see businesses advertising themselves as being 24/7, meaning they are open all day, every day. But are they truly 24/7 businesses, manned regardless of the time or day, or is it just a euphemism for being there when you need them, within reason? Continue reading

REUTERS | Arnd Wiegmann

These are tough times for contractors. A recent Construction News survey of price prediction data revealed that tender prices are dropping, with an expected average reduction of 3.7% during 2010. In a market where contractors are battling to survive, here are my top three tips for addressing the risk of contractor insolvency.

Continue reading

REUTERS | Eduardo Munoz

I’m sure most adjudicator’s would agree that reasons are part and parcel of their decisions. We may not be required to provide reasons, unless requested to do so (for example, see paragraph 22, Scheme for Construction Contracts 1998) but, in practice, when we are making findings on issues of law or fact, it is unusual for adjudicators not to set out the reasoning behind those findings. It ensures your thinking is clear and logical, and providing reasons also assists the parties in understanding why you have reached the conclusions that you have in your decision. Continue reading

REUTERS | David Bebber

There’s no getting away from the fact that the changes to Part II of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (Construction Act 1996), to be made by Part 8 of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 (LDEDC Act 2009), are important. However, while some things will change, many things will stay the same.

Don’t ignore the amendments and hope they will go away. The ostrich approach, sticking your head in the sand, will quickly backfire. So, what should you do? Continue reading

REUTERS | Russell Boyce

We learnt from Fun Boy 3 and Bananarama that “it ain’t what you do it’s the way that you do it… and that’s what gets results”. But how, you might wonder, does that help us enter the arcane world of delay analysis?

I went to a seminar last week on City Inn v Shepherd and learnt much the same thing as Bananarama taught us from one of the speakers – Alan Whitaker – who was Shepherd’s expert witness. Alan’s view was that he had to “get into what the project was all about” and, according to the judge at first instance, he did precisely that: Continue reading

REUTERS | Jason Lee

The planned nuclear new build programme in the UK has been the subject of much discussion over the last few years: will the new coalition government support, oppose or be indifferent to it? On a more personal level, how safe is nuclear power and do people want it on their doorstep? Commercially, there have been numerous debates about the economics of nuclear power, not least balance sheet capacity and financing structures that can be utilised for the programme.

Whatever your views, one thing is clear: the UK needs a secure energy supply and this, combined with a commitment to embracing a low carbon economy, has shifted focus away from discussing the hurdles to actually delivering the new nuclear build programme.

Continue reading

Share this post on: