REUTERS | Navesh Chitrakar

March 2016 digest: budget, payment and procurement

Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland:

“‘Take some more tea’, the March Hare said to Alice, very earnestly.
‘I’ve had nothing yet’, Alice replied in an offended tone, ‘so I can’t take more’.
‘You mean you can’t take less’, said the Hatter: ‘it’s very easy to take more than nothing’.
‘Nobody asked your opinion’, said Alice.”

Some may feel that this month’s budget was a bit like Alice’s exchange. There was more in it for some, less for others. As we said at the time, we are scratching our heads to find a sweetener for the construction industry, although those who like to pour some sugar in their tea (or coffee) may have to wait a while before they are subject to the new tax. For all the other budget-related news, see our budget landing page.

Prior to the budget, the National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) published reports on the transport needs of the north (including HS3) and London (including Crossrail 2). After the budget, these were followed by the government’s Construction Strategy and its National Infrastructure Delivery Plan.

The jurisprudence on the meaning of the Construction Act 1996’s payment provisions continues to grow, with Carr J considering the validity of a contractor’s interim application for payment. John Hughes D’AethIain Murdoch and Matt Molloy all looked at the implications arising from Manor Asset v Demolition Services, while Daniel Cashmore considered the use of payment schedules following Grove v Balfour Beatty.

No new adjudication enforcement cases were reported this month, but we still had plenty of comment, with Matt Molloy looking at multiple disputes and the meaning of paragraph 8(1) of the Scheme for Construction Contracts 1998 and whether a paying party would suffer manifest injustice if it paidJonathan Cope discussed whether the same dispute had been referred to adjudication previously and unmeritorious enforcement challenges.

Some interesting issues have been before the courts this month, with the:

18 April 2016 is an important date for public procurement and this month saw the Concessions Contracts and Utilities Contracts Regulations finally published, along with some Amendments, Repeals and Revocations Regulations. In Scotland, the Procurement (Scotland) Regulations were published, along with some guidance on them. Elsewhere, we published a public procurement case digest and policy review, the Court of Session considered Shetland Line’s claim regarding ferry services to the Northern Isles, and Michael Bowsher QC pondered the impact of Brexit on procurement law.

There was plenty of comment this month, with:

In other news, the CIS compliance test was changed and relaxed, new EPC Regulations were laid before Parliament (with consequential amendments to the Building Regulations), the Welsh are consulting on sustainability changes and the Party Wall etc. Act 1996 was amended to allow electronic communication.

And finally, it’s all in the meaning of a word, especially when that word is “architect“. Just ask Brighton’s metalcore band, Architects.

Practical Law Monthly digest

Leave a Reply

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

Share this post on: