REUTERS | Jon Nazca

January 2017 digest: Brexit, of course (and payment)

The Clash famously sang, “Should I stay or should I go now?”. In light of the Supreme Court’s Article 50 judgment and the subsequent news coverage, one might wonder if that applies to Brexit and should be “Will we stay or will we leave now?”. As the saying goes, only time will tell and, in the meantime, we should look at other events in January.

We started the month by telling you what to expect in 2017 (as did Jonathan Cope) and ended the month highlighting the changes to our note on payment under the Construction Act 1996. In the middle, we published a note on the key changes to the JCT Intermediate Building Contract 2016 (IC 2016), our schedule of amendments to the IC 2016 and told you we’d updated our pre-construction services agreement (PCSA) so that it is suitable for use with the JCT Design and Build Contract, 2016 edition. We don’t know when the rest of the JCT 2016 will be published, but we know new ACE professional appointments have been.

The courts got off to a flying start in 2017, with several interesting judgments:

In  other news, the government is consulting on its industrial strategy, the NIC published a corporate plan and the European Commission launched a consultation on large infrastructure projects.

On the comment front, John Hughes-D’Aeth looked at alliancing using NEC3, Matt Molloy considered the end of a Caribbean dream in Harlequin v Wilkins Kennedy, Elizabeth Repper provided a mediation case law update, Elizabeth Stonebank discussed guaranteed maximum price contracts, Iain Murdoch referred to a conference on expert evidence, and Edward Davies considered ethical policies.

Practical Law Monthly digest

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *