Monthly Archives: February 2014

REUTERS | Heinz-Peter Bader
February 28, 2014

February 2014 digest: Jackson reforms, adjudication and auroras

Wikipedia:

“An aurora (from the Latin word aurora, “sunrise” or the Roman goddess of dawn) is a natural light display in the sky particularly in the high latitude (Arctic and Antarctic) regions, caused by the collision of energetic charged particles with atoms in the high altitude atmosphere (thermosphere).”

February is sometimes described as a bridge between January and March, a month that connects winter to spring. Some days are wet, some dry, most are cold, while others tantalise us with weak sunshine and a sign of spring to come. This year it has just been grey and wet, but milder than usual, with long days of rain. However, as the month came to a close (and it seems that for many parts of the country, it went out with a colourful bang), the rains and flooding thankfully started to dissipate. The effects of this are likely to be felt for a long time to come and we set out a few legal points to help you. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Eric Thayer
February 26, 2014

The wrong side of the tracks: indemnities and asset protection agreements

It is very difficult to procure a construction or engineering project in a city like London without encountering at least one third party with potentially “at risk” assets. Typically, these third parties want their assets protected, measures taken to mitigate the risk of damage and insurance-backed compensation arrangements put in place to cover any conseqeuntial costs or losses should damage occur.

As a result, many third parties (especially statutory undertakers) have finely tuned asset protection agreements (APAs), which usually require compensation for their costs and losses to be on an indemnity basis.  Continue reading →

REUTERS | Carlos Barria
February 25, 2014

Setting the judicial cat amongst the adjudication pigeons

I often wonder what it must be like to be the author of a legal text book, especially one that covers an area like adjudication law, where cases come out of the courts thick and fast. No sooner is a book published that it is out of date as a result of those new cases.

That’s certainly true following HHJ Raynor QC’s judgment in Hillcrest Homes Ltd v Beresford and Curbishley Ltd, which I think is a significant case (covering four important issues). I’m guessing it will appear on multiple occasions in the next edition of Coulson on Construction Adjudication and the like. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Jumana El Heloueh
February 19, 2014

Floods, storms and tempests: what does your contract say?

The human impact of this winter’s extreme weather has been telling. Householders, farmers, businesses small and large have all been affected. Many building sites will be waterlogged, if not flooded, hindering heavy plant access and causing myriad practical issues, if work is to continue. Urgent repair and remediation projects must start straight away, often with teams hurrying to help those in need, while contract terms take a back seat. Although many potential legal issues caused as a result of these events will be solved by time and cool heads, if the weather now improves, legal stock-taking may be one part of your response. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Mike Blake
February 14, 2014

Arbitrations, agreements and alternative arguments

The TCC’s decision in The Secretary of State for Defence v Turner Estate Solutions Ltd provides yet another example of the courts refusing to interfere with the arbitration process and disturb an arbitral tribunal’s award. In addition, it:

  • Is further evidence of the difficulties a party faces in making a challenge under section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996.
  • Reinforces the now well-established principle (see for example Zermalt Holdings SA v Nu-Life Upholstery Repairs Ltd (1985) 2 EGLR 14) that the courts will strive to uphold arbitration awards and will only intervene in the most extreme cases.

The case also provides a useful analysis of the approach that a court may take to various provisions of section 68 of the Act. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Mike Blake
February 11, 2014

Is the cost of litigating set to rise as court fees are increased?

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has consulted on increasing court fees, including in the TCC. The aim is to reduce the cost to the taxpayer; to achieve full cost recovery by making those who can afford to pay contribute more to the costs of the courts.

Many lawyers are up in arms about the proposals. My initial thought was that the proposals seemed broadly reasonable, especially when compared with the cost of arbitration, but that can’t be the only measure. The MoJ must also consider the disproportionate impact on smaller disputes, often brought by individuals or SMEs. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Amit Dave
February 11, 2014

Injunction in adjudication, where does that leave the adjudicator’s fees?

When I was reading Edwards-Stuart J’s judgment in Twintec v Volkerfitzpatrick, I was a little bit surprised to see he’d granted an interim injunction to prevent the referring party (Volkerfitzpatrick) from continuing with its adjudication while he decided whether the adjudicator was properly appointed. On the facts, the final injunction was less of a surprise. Perhaps what was more surprising was that the responding party (Twintec) had elected to use the injunction route, rather than the more common declaratory relief route (under CPR Part 8).

Continue reading →

Share this post on: