The draft amendments to the Scheme for Construction Contracts 1998 were published last week. Although they have been a long time coming, having now read them, I’m not sure it’s been worth the wait. They are, in my view, a “damp squib“. Continue reading
Calvin Coolidge, 30th President of the USA (attributed):
“Nothing is easier than spending the public money. It does not appear to belong to anybody. The temptation is overwhelming to bestow it on somebody.”
March saw the Government deliver its (final?) Budget. As there was little in the Budget for the construction industry, the reaction to it was muted.
March was also a busy month elsewhere in the construction and engineering world: the draft revised Scheme has finally landed! In other words, the consultation on the proposed amendments to the Scheme for Construction Contracts 1998 was published this month. If they become law, the amendments will affect both adjudication and payment under construction contracts. The amendments follow the changes introduced by Part 8 of the LDEDC Act 2009. They have been eagerly awaited and, if you want to respond, you have until 18 June 2010 to do so. Continue reading
I went to hear Sir Vivian Ramsey speak last week at the Worshipful Company of Arbitrators‘ Annual Master’s Lecture. His talk was called “Open secrets: the concept of confidentiality in dispute resolution”. He focused on the concepts of privacy and confidentiality in arbitration, mediation and the courts, and only mentioned adjudication briefly.
Sir Vivian’s talk got me thinking about whether there is a duty of confidentiality in adjudication and, if there is, where does it come from? Continue reading
In Selby Hall and Philip Shivers v Jan Van Der Heiden, Coulson J rejected the suggestion that the defendant contractor’s liability to pay liquidated damages came to an end when its employment under the building contract was terminated as a result of its breach.
“I have heard that there is a new crane register coming into force. I have a crane erected on a construction site. What do I need to do?”
The tower crane register
The Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) new tower crane register comes into force on 6 April 2010. It is being introduced by the Notification of Conventional Tower Cranes Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/333). Continue reading
At the Worshipful Company of Arbitrators’ Annual Master’s Lecture yesterday, Sir Vivian Ramsey, the judge in charge of the TCC, discussed the concept of confidentiality in dispute resolution. A copy of the speech should appear on the WCA’s website (as previous lectures have) but, in the meantime, here is a taster. Continue reading
Edwards-Stuart J seems to be making waves in the world of adjudication enforcement since his appointment to the TCC last year. First he severed an adjudicator’s decision, then he appeared to introduce a threshold test into applications to stay enforcement proceedings. Now he has granted an injunction, restraining three companies from pursuing three adjudications that they had started against their former engineer on a project. Continue reading
Such an easy question to ask, but how easy is it to answer?
It seems to me that there is no straightforward answer.
An adjudicator is expected to investigate his own jurisdiction when the notice of adjudication is served. It is accepted that he should resign if he concludes he has no jurisdiction to deal with the dispute. An adjudicator may conclude that he has no jurisdiction for a multitude of reasons; over the years parties and the courts have come up with a long list of these. Continue reading
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
