The Court of Appeal’s judgment in Sutton Housing Partnership v Rydon Maintenance Ltd has the quality that I value most in any judgment: it is a triumph of common sense. Continue reading
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d8346/d83468f6591fc97c3cd8dbb8df7cd78f704e9352" alt=""
Sutton v Rydon, a triumph of common sense
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/9456d/9456da2c310533bc1f96cde5fe7db4eb39ab83ee" alt=""
There are a number of interesting aspects to HHJ Keyser QC’s judgment in Dawnus Construction Holdings v Amey LG Ltd, not least that during the course of the project, the parties referred four separate disputes to four different adjudicators. That makes it a really good example of serial adjudication, if ever I saw one. It also demonstrates some of the difficulties that can arise on construction projects, particularly when parties seek to incorporate main contract terms into a sub-contract. Continue reading
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/13be6/13be6e7d6379a3ae77aea75935db4f72649bf576" alt=""
FIDIC White Book: A step in the right direction
The FIDIC Client/Consultant Model Services Agreement (fourth edition, 2006) – usually known as the White Book – was a rather frustrating form for lawyers. Happily, the new White Book (fifth edition, 2017) addresses some of the frustrations and is a more balanced starting point.
The form was particularly frustrating for those advising employer clients, who assumed that it would be consistent with the FIDIC construction contracts and therefore was practically plug-and-play with the 1999 Rainbow Suite. This view was often encouraged by consultants who advised a FIDIC procurement route and then proffered the White Book as the appropriate form of contract for their own appointment.
Employers were surprised that it was not consistent and that their liability to the contractor for any poor performance of the engineer, could not be passed on to the party actually responsible. In addition, they were surprised at the sheer volume of amendments required to protect their legitimate interests. “What, then, is the use of a standard form?”, they would ask. A perfectly reasonable question. Continue reading