REUTERS | Carlos Barria
June 22, 2016

What has changed in JCT Minor Works 2016?

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 →

REUTERS | Neil Hall
June 15, 2016

UK property market: a peek behind the fig leaf

As Brexit fears abound, the general consensus seems to be that the UK property market has peaked and is showing signs of cooling down. Some blame the spectre of a “leave” vote in the forthcoming referendum but predict a return to “business as usual” if the UK votes to remain. Others, with a focus on London, fear that the new Mayor and his views on housing and infrastructure could be an exacerbating factor. The glass half-empty crowd, and I count myself in this number, fear that Brexit may be a mere fig leaf masking the cyclical nature of the market and the ultimate inevitability of a downward cycle at some point in the not too distant future. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Beawiharta
June 14, 2016

Is expert shopping like parties manipulating the adjudicator appointment process?

Over the years, I’ve discussed many aspects of expert evidence, but I’m not sure I’ve covered expert shopping before. It was an issue that was before the TCC in Birmingham recently in Coyne v Morgan and another (t/a Hillfield Home Improvement) and it made me wonder if it is very different from when parties seek to manipulate the adjudicator nomination process. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Maxim Shemetov
June 8, 2016

The cost of switching experts

There are many reasons why a party might wish to change expert witness. For example, the litigation may have dragged on for some time and the expert may wish to be released, a fee (or other) dispute may have arisen and sometimes it becomes apparent that they are simply not up to the job.

The recent TCC decision in Coyne v Morgan and another t/a Hillfield Home Improvement provides a helpful summary of the principles that apply when a party seeks the court’s permission for such a change. Notably, it provides a timely reminder that the cost of that change may well be the disclosure of draft reports and/or other documents prepared by the first expert. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Michaela Rehle
June 7, 2016

“It’s adjudication Jim, but not as we know it”

I’ve borrowed this week’s title from Star Trek, although (according to the Google search I did), none of the original crew actually said “It’s life Jim, but not as we know it”, that comes from the song, Star Trekkin’. However, that is simply an aside and it doesn’t have a lot to do with the my topic for this week, the adjudication pilot for professional negligence claims (the pilot scheme).

“What’s that?”, I hear you ask. Well, until last week, it wasn’t something I was aware of either. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Nir Elias
June 1, 2016

The Chinese “Belt and Road” initiative

In the run up to 23 June 2016, there is a danger that the UK is so caught up in the throes of Brexit that it ignores news of exciting opportunities further afield. One such opportunity is the Chinese “Belt and Road” initiative (also known as One Belt One Road or OBOR).

This initiative, which is central to China’s economic plan, has been causing a stir in the world of global infrastructure, as it presents significant opportunities for funders, international consultants and professional service providers. This post takes a look at this exciting initiative in more detail. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Beawiharta
June 1, 2016

You have a retention of title clause but will you be paid?

I am returning to the topic of retention of title clauses (which I last discussed in 2013) because in PST Energy 7 Shipping LLC v OW Bunker Malta Ltd, the Supreme Court considered a difficult point on the interplay of these clauses and a seller’s remedies when it has not been paid but there has been a sub-sale.

Retention of title clauses

To recap, retention of title clauses are commonly inserted in contracts for the supply of construction materials. Typically, a supplier will sell goods to a contractor subject to such a clause. The contractor will be permitted to resell them to the employer and they will usually become the employer’s property once “built in” to the works.

However, if the retention of title clause is effective as between the supplier and contractor and the contract price is unpaid, then the supplier may seek to proceed under the contract for the price applicable. Continue reading →

REUTERS | Toby Melville
May 31, 2016

May 2016 digest: Queen’s Speech and elections

English proverb:

“Ne’er cast a clout till May be out.”

This phrase has been in use since at least the 18th century and is generally taken to mean that you shouldn’t be too keen to leave your winter clothes behind. There is a debate about whether the May reference is to the month or blossom from the hawthorn (or May) tree, which is synonymous with the countryside at this time of year. Whichever you prefer, the phrase has been particularly relevant this year. Continue reading →