Earlier this year I wrote about Coulson J’s judgment in Deluxe Art & Theme Ltd v Beck Interiors Ltd. At the time, I wondered how parties in adjudication may react, particularly the responding party. It may only be a few months on but, with the restriction on the number of disputes that can now be before the same adjudicator at the same time, I am already seeing the impact of Deluxe v Beck on a party’s behaviour and tactics. Continue reading
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
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.”
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
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
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
Charles de Gaulle, who vetoed British accession to the European Economic Community (EEC) for years, speaking in 1967:
“There is the Common Market, and for us, there is no problem. For you, there is one: you want to get in, and that is your problem.”
Almost fifty years on, how times have changed.
There was only one story this month. Prior to knowing the result, June seemed to be all about the remain and leave referendum campaigns. Since we woke up on 24 June to the news that the UK has voted to leave the European Union, there is still only one story.
It may be too soon to tell what impact this will have on the construction sector, one that is economically sensitive to the smallest of fluctuations in labour and the price of materials, and what the future holds for all the infrastructure projects in the pipeline. As Paul Morrell, the former Chief Construction Adviser, said to Construction News:
“As I walk down my street and people are having their domestic work done, all I hear are Eastern European voices. I just don’t know who’s going to build stuff now.”
The Society of Construction Law (SCL) has recently issued a consultation draft of the second edition of its Delay and Disruption Protocol (Protocol). The object of the Protocol is to provide guidance on some of the common delay and disruption issues that arise on construction projects. Its stated purpose is to provide a means by which the parties can resolve these matters and avoid unnecessary disputes.
SCL has asked that feedback is given to feedback@eotprotocol.com by 8 July 2016 and if you have any interest in this topic I would encourage you to read it and give your views. Continue reading
Almost a year ago I wrote about Peter Smith J’s recusal in Emerald Supplies v British Airways, which was made all the more interesting because it came about following the judge’s trip to Florence and his lost luggage experience on the return flight.
More recently Peter Smith J has been in the news because of a letter he sent to Blackstone Chambers following an article that appeared in the Times after the lost luggage affair. That article was written by Lord Pannick QC (who practices from Blackstone Chambers). The judge’s letter came into the public domain when another case he was presiding over ended up in the Court of Appeal (Harb v HRH Prince Abdul Aziz Bin Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz). (If you are interested, both the article and letter are reproduced in the judgment.)
It is not the judge’s letter writing activities that I want to concentrate on, but the Court of Appeal’s comments regarding witness evidence and judicial bias. Continue reading
The JCT launched its 2016 edition of the Minor Works suite of contracts on 15 June 2016. This will be followed by the other JCT contract suites, which will be rolled out family by family. We understand that the next contracts to be published will be the short form of sub-contract and sub-subcontract (date to be confirmed), followed by the design and build (JCT DB) family in the autumn this year.
This post looks at some of the key changes in the minor works suite:
Many of these changes were expected, but others may take practitioners by surprise. The JCT has also taken the opportunity to tighten up some of the drafting, clarify certain provisions and update the guidance notes within the contracts. Continue reading
