REUTERS | Mohamed Nureldin Abdallah

October 2015 digest: seven year itch!

Ernest Hemingway:

“For a long time now I have tried simply to write the best I can. Sometimes I have good luck and write better than I can.”

Practical Law Construction turned seven this month. Over the last seven years, just like Ernest, we have done the best we can to keep our subscribers abreast of developments in the world of construction law. After seven years, we hope you feel that you can’t live without us. Certainly, we couldn’t exist without you!

As we are clearly wedded to our subscribers, according to Wikipedia, after seven years the traditional wedding anniversary gift in the UK is woollen (wool or copper in the USA). Apparently the Chicago Public Library suggests a modern gift list of desk sets or pen and pencil sets. That may seem apt for a team that writes for a living!

After the summer recess, the Michaelmas term has exploded into life, with a number of interesting judgments to write about, including (on adjudication) whether:

Other issues before the courts have included whether:

  • A project monitoring surveyor was negligent and whether the funder was contributorily negligent (they both were), which Jonathan Cope discussed.
  • A contract included an exclusive remedies clause and there was no condition precedent in the force majeure clause (it did and there wasn’t). Helena White looked at how the court interpreted the contract.
  • To grant an injunction restraining a building contractor from issuing a winding-up petition against its employer (in light of section 111(10) of the Construction Act 1996) (it did). Matt Molloy considered why the contractor did not adjudicate its payment claim and Michael Mendelblat considered if winding-up is the best route to getting paid.
  • To grant summary judgment on a third party’s claim under the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 when there was a limitation of liability clause in the contractor’s collateral warranty (it refused).
  • An oral contract to negotiate a land purchase was a construction contract (it wasn’t).
  • A professional consultant was entitled to damages for unpaid fees, subject to deductions for losses arising from its negligence (it was).
  • The parties could amend their statements of case seven weeks before trial, even though it meant vacating the trial date (they could and it was).

Section 54 of the Modern Slavery Act 2015 came into force on 29 October 2015. It requires commercial organisations with a total turnover above £36 million to prepare an annual slavery and human trafficking statement for each financial year ending on or after 31 March 2016. To assist, we published new materials and updated our JCT schedules of amendments to include an obligation on the contractor to comply with the Act.

Staying with writing (and specifically drafting a contract), other developments of interest include revised Z clauses for the NEC3 contracts and amendments to reflect the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (which also came into force this month).

We’ve always thought writing a blog for us was relatively easy (about 1,000 words on a topical issue). This month has seen topics as varied as:

In other news, the Housing and Planning Bill was finally published, there will be an inquiry into privatising GIB, carbon emissions standards for supply chains were published and the National Infrastructure Commission and the RICS’ new arbitration service were launched.

…and finally, we understand that electronic working went live in all the Rolls Building courts this month.

Practical Law Monthly digest

One thought on “October 2015 digest: seven year itch!

  1. I really love this blog! It’s amazing to read a lot of information and insights about the real estate and construction industry. Keep it up!

Leave a Reply

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

Share this post on: