The overwhelming practice in international arbitration is for disclosure to be governed by the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration (the IBA Rules). The IBA Rules’ disclosure requirements are equivalent to option two of Jackson LJ’s proposed menu of options for disclosure (as set out in his preliminary report). In my view, experience of how the IBA Rules work in practice provides some useful lessons about Jackson LJ’s option two.
In December 2010, I was involved in resisting an application to lift the automatic suspension imposed by regulation 47G(1) of the Public Contracts (Amendment) Regulations 2009 (SI 2009/2992) (2009 Regulations) so as to enable a hospital trust to award a public contract to the successful tenderer.
This post sets out my experience of the court’s approach in considering whether to grant the interim order that the hospital trust sought. Continue reading
Traditional procurement has come under scrutiny recently and has acquired a poor reputation in some quarters. It is accused of being adversarial, inefficient and fragmented. It is even suggested that lawyers recommending a traditional procurement route may be negligent! Some would have us believe that the grass is greener elsewhere, but I am sceptical.
Once again, it’s time for the Berwin Leighton Paisner Christmas quiz. Why not test your knowledge of construction law? This year’s quiz is as challenging as ever. Continue reading
It’s been an “interesting” six months for the infrastructure industry in the UK. I can’t remember a time when there has been so much policy focus from government on infrastructure.
Construction projects nearly always involve a number of parties. For example, in addition to the employer and the contractor, most projects include the services of consultant engineers and architects, with various sub-contractors engaged along the contractual line. Sometimes there are funders and developers too. Therefore, it is not unusual for disputes to arise between a number of different parties and for one party to find itself “stuck in the middle”, defending claims while, at the same time, seeking to pass on liability to others further down the contractual chain.
This is exactly what happened to the M&E sub-contractor on the fit-out works at Linklaters’ office premises. Continue reading
An adjudicator cannot determine a dispute which is the same, or substantially the same, as one which has been decided in a previous adjudication. When faced with such a claim, an adjudicator should resign. If he issues a decision, the decision will be unenforceable, as he had no jurisdiction to issue it. It is a matter of fact in each case, whether or not the dispute is the same as that from a previous adjudication, so in certain cases, the answer to the question may not be obvious, even if the principle is.
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.
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.
Where one party has carried out work for another, the party who performed the work has (broadly speaking) two options for seeking payment for that work. The choice depends on whether there is a concluded contract and, as always, the facts of the case. If there is a concluded contract, that’s great, bring a claim under that. However, if there is no contract, all is not lost. You may be able to bring a claim under the law of restitution.
