Legal views 鈥� Page 85
-
Comment
Common mistakes in... agreeing final accounts
Berwin Leighton Paisner鈥檚 new series on 鈥淒os and Don鈥檛s鈥澛爋ffers practical advice on navigating the major projects鈥� minefield, beginning with聽Catherine Barstow鈥檚 advice on organising your work so that you鈥檙e ready for the final account
-
Comment
Prompt payment: The other credit crunch
The government is making it a rule that all firms on public sector contracts be paid promptly, all the way down the supply chain. Which will come as a bit of a shock to some
-
CommentBSF exclusivity agreements: More punishment to come
Companies whose schemes escaped the 精东影视 Schools for the Future cull should not bank on their exclusivity arrangements continuing unscathed
-
CommentWhat鈥檚 so great about the TCC?
The principal arena for construction dispute settlement has become a major force in the English legal system
-
Comment
New Construction Act: Got a pen and paper handy?
A party can wriggle out of adjudication today by claiming there is no contract in writing. But once the new Construction Act comes into force, that excuse will no longer run
-
Comment
To the letter
Giving notice need to ensure they comply precisely with contract requirements in extension of time or loss and expense clauses
-
Comment
Insurance issues for fit-outs
If a tenant that occupies one floor of an office block wants to have a fit-out done, who insures the rest of the building against, for example, fire and flood?
-
CommentIn absentia: Jean Shaw vs James Scott Builders
This case is all about missing persons, missing contracts, missing drawings and missing deadlines. So no surprise when eventually it all turned around a missing email
-
CommentDefine 鈥榣ate鈥�: City Inn vs Shepherd
The case of City Inn vs Shepherd has already created debate over how delays should be treated. It also has much to say about JCT80鈥檚 treatment of when instructions are due
-
Comment
Accidents will happen 鈥� in adjudication
After getting on for 500 enforcements, one thing is clear: an adjudicator is expected to make mistakes. But that is the fault of the system - and it鈥檚 outweighed by its benefits
-
Comment
Prepare yourself for a shock: D&O insurance for corporate manslaughter
The Corporate Manslaughter Act puts company executives in the firing line for breaches of health and safety, so it鈥檚 wise to get some protection
-
CommentRIBA conditions of appointment: A return to a simpler time
The RIBA鈥檚 latest conditions of appointment aren鈥檛 perfect, but they鈥檝e swept away many of the onerous obligations in the 2007 edition
-
Comment
City Inn vs Shepherd: How much sand is a snowstorm worth?
Let鈥檚 delve deeper into City Inn vs Shepherd. At first glance, it looks like the three appeal judges came to different conclusions on relevant events. Look again 鈥�
-
CommentPFI can鈥檛 take sting out of cuts
Public sector clients tempted to reintroduce cancelled projects as variations to existing PFIs may be breaking the rules
-
Comment
Set-off on the right foot
The law governing situations where two parties owe each other money is murky. But a recent Court of Appeal case sheds some useful light
-
Comment
City Inn vs Shepherd: Have you seen the contractor鈥檚 behind?
If a storm and a contractor both delay a project, is the contractor eligible for an extension? This ancient problem has just had another going over in the Scottish Court of Appeal
-
Comment
Traditional Structures Limited v HW Construction: Rectifying a unilateral mistake
A subcontractor loses out by mistakenly omitting the cost of cladding in a tender. What does the judge decide?
-
CommentHow to force clients to pay more quickly
A quarter of contractors wait over 60 days for payment from clients. Here are the legal routes to prompter payments
-
CommentLLPs: You鈥檙e not bullet proof
Don鈥檛 be fooled by the apparent protection offered by a limited liability partnership - you could still find the family home is at risk if the LLP goes under
-
CommentRelationship problems
If an adjudicator has a prior connection with one of the advocates arguing a case, does that constitute 鈥檃pparent bias鈥�? Here鈥檚 what the court had to say 鈥�