Legal views 鈥� Page 81
-
CommentOnce upon a time
The law determining whether there should be an extension of time when both employer and contractor are to blame for a delay in construction, is in disarray
-
CommentWhat the High Court victory means for BSF
Six local authorities won a partial victory against the government鈥檚 decision to scrap BSF. What happens next?
-
CommentA guide to zero-tolerance in the workplace
Laing O鈥橰ourke is not the only employer to take a tough stance on IT misuse, but how far can employers go and how can they ensure staff are treated fairly?
-
Comment
House rules
锘緾onsultants are at a greater risk of being sued in the downturn, but if you follow these basic rules, you can mitigate a potential claim
-
CommentRobinson vs PE Jones: Duty in tort
锘緼 quirk in the law of limitation means a claim for economic loss under a contract has a different time limit from the same claim brought in tort
-
CommentJust cause and impediment
锘縔our subcontractor just isn鈥檛 up to scratch, so you fire him and hire someone else 鈥� but in doing so you stand accused of repudiating the contract. So what are your options?
-
-
CommentPromises, promises
锘縄ndemnities should oblige another party to take responsibility for your loss, but not if the wording gives them room to wriggle out of paying up
-
CommentHow to stay out of hell
If we treated design as a risk management issue, we鈥檇 probably save ourselves vast amounts of time and money sorting out the mess at the construction phase
-
Comment
Love thy neighbour
锘縏he Scottish planning system encourages inclusivity and good relationships between developers and communities. Now, that approach will be backed up by law
-
CommentHow losers win
It truly is a topsy turvy world when some companies manage to profit from failing to win a bid for a contract. But that鈥檚 European regulations for you 鈥�
-
CommentFace the music
锘縋assing the liability parcel is a favourite party game, but a judgment in the TCC shows how important it is to get the contract right
-
Comment
Common mistakes in ... tiered dispute resolution clauses
锘縏he fourth in a series on dos and don鈥檛s on major projects discusses tiered dispute resolution clauses, which can save you time, money and paper hankies
-
CommentComing back for seconds
A first adjudicator鈥檚 decisions are a no-go area for a second adjudicator. But it鈥檚 open season on the bits that didn鈥檛 actually decide the dispute
-
Comment
THE NAME鈥橲 BOND
锘緽onds are a crucial part of contractual relationships, but do you know your on-demand bond from your conditional bond? A recent case should help you
-
CommentCan we be of any assistance?
锘縇ike it or not, lawyers are tending to intrude into the adjudication process. Perhaps the industry should stop resisting and treat them as a guiding hand
-
CommentWinning on penalties
锘縔ou may have agreed a sum for breach of contract, but there鈥檚 an old common-law doctrine that could see it struck down as a penalty. Fortunately this does not happen often, says Tim Elliott
-
CommentThis is never going to work
Retention funds waste everybody鈥檚 time and achieve nothing of value. Here鈥檚 a case that shows, yet again, why we should ditch them
-
CommentIt's PFI, Jim, but not as we know it
锘縍eports of the death of PFI are exaggerated, but the funding model is going to have to change to reflect a time of public sector austerity
-
CommentHow to claim compensation for the snow
If the recent snow has caused disruption to a construction project you can make a claim, but you need to know how the various contract forms work first 鈥�