The practice of novating design consultants is now a ubiquitous feature of design and build (D&B) contracts in the UK. Over the last 20 years or so, informed by decisions such as Blyth & Blyth Ltd v Carillion Construction Ltd, the wording of novation agreements has evolved to the stage of a largely market standard position, which is generally accepted by both contractors and consultants. Continue reading
By now, I’m sure you will have seen (or heard about) Edwards-Stuart J’s judgment in Galliford Try v Estura and will, no doubt, have formed your own view as to the implications for adjudication, both in terms of a party’s ability to start a counter adjudication following a “smash and grab” adjudication, and also with regard to issues that will be raised in enforcement proceedings.
While much may be written about the payment side of things, I rather covered that off when I wrote about Edwards-Stuart J’s judgment in Harding v Paice and Jonathan addressed the issues following Edwards-Stuart J’s judgment in ISG v Seevic. What I want to concentrate on are the “manifest injustice” points. Continue reading
Last week I participated in Practical Law’s breakfast roundtable, Adjudication appointment tactics: The do’s and don’ts following recent case law. The roundtable was led by Fionnuala McCredie QC and Paul Bury, barristers at Keating Chambers, and Suber Akther, solicitor-advocate at Siemens plc, who were the legal team involved in Eurocom Ltd v Siemens plc.
The workshop explored the various tactics that parties may use when seeking to obtain adjudication appointments, looking at the issues from the perspectives of both the referring party and the responding party. Our discussions centred on the nomination process and the issues that arose in Eurocom. Continue reading
Taking up the challenge: the role of mediation, DABs and other ADR methods in the Middle East
Mediation and DABs
Last week, I looked at mediation and dispute adjudication boards (DABs) in the Middle East. This week, I will continue my thoughts by looking at other possible methods of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), before considering what may be next for ADR in the region. Continue reading
I recently blogged about Savoye v Spicers, where Savoye successfully enforced the adjudicator’s decision after Akenhead J agreed that the conveyor belt Savoye installed formed part of the land and therefore the work constituted “construction operations” for the purposes of section 105 of the Construction Act 1996. As a result, the contract was a “construction contract” for the purposes of section 104. This meant that the adjudicator’s finding that Savoye was entitled to be paid the sum it claimed as a result of Spicers’ not serving the requisite payment notices (some £828,000 plus interest) was enforced.
Akenhead J has now handed-down his costs judgment, and it raises some interesting points. Savoye’s costs were a hefty £201,790 for the adjudication enforcement, albeit the matter was resolved in a short trial after a unsuccessful summary judgment application. Continue reading
Algernon Charles Swinburne, Atalanta in Calydon:
“For winter’s rains and ruins are over and all the season of snows and sins… And in green underwood and cover, blossom by blossom the spring begins.”
The first signs of spring may still feel a long way off but 6 April isn’t. In case you are unaware of the date’s significance, it is when the CDM 2015 come into force. During February we continued to prepare for that day, publishing a number of new resources (a note of frequently asked questions, five duty-holder checklists and a toolkit of our materials) and updating others (including our professional appointments). We also provided you with a comparison with the HSE’s draft regulations and told you that the JCT will publish amendment sheets. Continue reading
I recently negotiated a contract for the storage and maintenance of high value critical equipment. In the context of insurance solutions we discussed the issue of joint names insurance; whether it was necessary or desirable in the context of our project, whether a waiver of subrogation was required under the contract and how this might affect the behaviour of the party who would benefit from not being subject to a subrogated claim.
In my experience, the issue of joint names insurance and subrogation can be tricky and often causes problems when negotiating commercial contracts, so I was relieved to see that the Court of Appeal holds the same view. Continue reading
Taking up the challenge: the role of mediation, DABs and other ADR methods in the Middle East
With a considerable number of new and on-going projects in the Middle East, efficiently resolving disputes remains a pertinent issue for contractors and employers alike. The fallout following the global recession led to multiple disputes, but have contracting parties learnt any lessons?
Traditionally, dispute resolution in the Middle East utilised arbitration or litigation for the resolution of disputes. Despite this, parties should consider alternative dispute resolution (ADR) options such as mediation, dispute adjudication boards (DABs) and expert determination. While in other jurisdictions, such as England and Wales, it is common for parties to be open to and adopt ADR methods, the take up of such methods in the Middle East is rare. Parties are generally reluctant to move away from the traditional forms of dispute resolution. This blog briefly describes these methods of ADR and their use in the Gulf region. Continue reading
In Broughton Brickwork Ltd v F Parkinson Ltd, HHJ Stephen Davies considered that an adjudicator’s failure to have regard to a particular document was not fatal and so enforced his decision.
While, at first blush, it may not seem critical to a party’s case if the adjudicator overlooks a document or two from the parties’ bundles, here the adjudicator said (after the event) that if he’d seen this particular document (an email serving a pay less notice) then Broughton’s (the sub-contractor) claim would have failed. Instead, he found that no pay less notice had been validly served by F Parkinson (the contractor) and so £96,000 odd was due to Broughton under its interim application.
But how did this situation even arise in the first place?
Continue reading
Over the years we’ve seen a number of adjudication cases in the TCC involving professional negligence, one of the most significant being London & Amsterdam Properties v Waterman Partnership. We’ve also had plenty of commentators question the suitability of adjudication for resolving professional negligence disputes. So with Valentine’s Day last week, I thought it appropriate to look at the latest professional negligence adjudication case to come out of the TCC and to consider whether professional negligence and adjudication are really an unsuitable match.
The case in question is Coulson J’s judgment in MW High Tec Projects v Haase Environmental Consulting, which concerned the design of a waste to energy plant constructed in Horsham, West Sussex. Continue reading