The courts have often stressed that parties should mediate early before litigation hardens attitudes and costs become an additional aggravating factor. In Kupeli and others v Sirketi (t/a Cyprus Turkish Airlines) and another, the High Court restated the now familiar message that parties should discuss or negotiate their dispute early. Continue reading
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/02beb/02beb9e40fd2dc965f2c83ddc194eb47ace0d645" alt=""
Mediation update: discussing and negotiating early
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d1dc3/d1dc37084d64c1680bd5073d7fbf388113928e83" alt=""
Common sense is over-rated
At first glance, Carillion Construction Ltd v Woods Bagot Europe Ltd and others appears to be important because it touches on a common issue in delay and disruption claims of how an extension of time is to be awarded.
However, on closer inspection the case is not really about delay and disruption. It is merely another case about interpreting contracts. The case is important because it is a prime example of the more limited role that commercial common sense has in the construction of contracts in the post Arnold v Britton world, in which Lord Neuberger said that:
“…the reliance placed in some cases on commercial common sense and surrounding circumstances … should not be invoked to undervalue the importance of the language of the provision which is to be construed.”
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3dab1/3dab1c944bf8463b8656a00e3f9207842f982e1b" alt=""
Some of you may recall that last year I wrote about Rider 1 to the SCL’s Delay and Disruption Protocol. Well, we now have the long-awaited second edition, which has been published in draft form for consultation.
Delay and disruption touches on many of the disputes that you will be involved in, so I would encourage you to comment if possible. The consultation closes on 8th July 2016, and comments should be sent to feedback@eotprotocol.com. Continue reading
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1c16a/1c16ac70bd62ce72b9c8ddb02dc6332026321135" alt=""
The UK and Gibraltar have voted to leave the European Union. That decision still needs to be formalised and the UK Government has stated this will be achieved through notification under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. That, in turn, commences official exit negotiations with the EU.
It has been debated whether or not Article 50 will ever be triggered. However, absent a significant about-turn from the public, it is hard to imagine a significant number of politicians derailing the referendum’s outcome. It is simply a matter of time. As for what happens next, your guess is as good as mine. Will membership of the EU be replaced with that of the European Economic Area or the European Free Trade Association? Or will we arrive someplace else entirely?
Much has been written about Brexit’s potential consequences for the construction market but, in brief, the industry will endure. Demand for new housing and developments will recover. Equally, upgrades to transport and energy infrastructure are necessary to boost the regions and help Britain sustain its competitiveness. Continue reading
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d0b22/d0b228e376765ebdeba377d0c50c4931c08ba82c" alt=""
Edmund Burke, Speech on conciliation with America:
“I am not determining a point of law; I am restoring tranquility.”
During the second quarter of 2016 we have seen a number of interesting decisions affecting construction and engineering practitioners. Continue reading