‘It is well known that practical completion is often easier to recognise than it is to define, which is why the Court of Appeal’s judgment in Mears Ltd v Costplan Services (South East) Ltd and others is an important read for construction practitioners.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 29th March 2019
‘A contractor has won a case in England over payment for work which was valued at nil by an adjudicator, after bringing new evidence to a later adjudication which the High Court said that the second adjudicator had jurisdiction to consider.’
OUT-LAW.com, 19th March 2019
Source: www.out-law.com
‘A new court ruling leaves us little further forward on an employer’s right to adjudicate the true value of the sum due under a construction contract after failing to serve payment notices and without first paying the amount demanded by the contractor.’
OUT-LAW.com, 27th February 2019
Source: www.out-law.com
‘Construction and engineering contracts often contain provisions specifying that, within a particular time, one party (traditionally the contractor) must notify the other (the employer and/or the contract administrator) of a claim or the likelihood that it might advance a claim. Sometimes these “time-bar” notice provisions are elevated beyond being merely an obligation, to the status of a condition precedent to being able to pursue a successful claim. If such provisions are enforceable, they can be severe: a failure to serve the required notice in the required timescale will be fatal, regardless of the merits of the underlying claim. A well-known example of such a provision is found in clause 20.1 of the 1999 FIDIC contracts.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 20th February 2019
‘In this case tender documentation appended to the Sub-Contract documentation had the effect of limiting the scope of obligations under the Sub-Contract.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 25th January 2019
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘Ever since 31 July 2018, when Fraser J handed down his judgment in Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd v Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (in liquidation) [2018] EWHC 2043 (TCC), many of those involved in either insolvency or construction have been in a state of confusion tinged with disbelief. The potential ramifications were quite startling and the unease was only heightened by the more or less contemporary but very different decision of HHJ Waksman QC (as he then was) in Cannon Corporate Ltd v Primus Build Ltd [2018] EWHC 2143 (TCC). Both matters came before the Court of Appeal in November, since when the legal profession has been holding its collective breath. Now that the Court of Appeal has handed down its much-awaited judgment in these conjoined appeals the exhalation has been audible.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 7th February 2019
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘With the Court of Appeal’s decision in Bresco Electrical Services Ltd v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd just a few weeks old, it is hardly surprising that people are looking again at the relationship between insolvency law and adjudication, noting that in cases of liquidation where parties have a cross claim, construction law defers to insolvency law.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 14th February 2019
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘This was a conjoined appeal alongside Bresco v Lonsdale. In this case, Cannon and Primus had already participated in an adjudication, with the decision of the adjudicator favouring Primus. Primus would later enter into a Company Voluntary Arrangement.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 13th February 2019
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘Summer 2018 will be remembered as a special time by many readers of this blog: whether it was the spectacular weather, the giddy heights hit by the England football team, or Fraser J’s decision in Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd v Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (In Liquidation), it was a summer to remember.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 6th February 2019
‘Companies in liquidation can theoretically refer claims to an adjudicator under construction law but it would be a futile exercise as the decision could not be enforced in most cases, the Court of Appeal in England has ruled.’
OUT-LAW.com, 4th February 2019
Source: www.out-law.com
‘It was only published at the end of last week, so I’m not sure if you’ve had chance to look at Coulson LJ’s judgment in Bresco Electrical Services Ltd v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd, Cannon Corporate Ltd v Primus Build Ltd. If not, then you should. It contains some important stuff about liquidation and CVAs, and when it is appropriate (and possible) to adjudicate if the referring party is subject to one of those processes.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 30th January 2019
‘Many a construction dispute turns on defects. A significant subset of those turn on whether the existence of defects prevents practical completion from taking place. It’s not surprising that these situations are contentious: contractors are keen that practical completion is certified so as to avoid or limit their liability for liquidated damages, trigger the return of retention monies and, often, to bring about an assessment of sums they consider due under the final account. Employers may be understandably reluctant to take possession of a property which they consider defective and by resisting practical completion an employer can put pressure on a contractor by withholding sums that would otherwise become due. Practical completion is therefore an important concept in construction contracts, although one that is often not precisely defined, which can cause uncertainty and hinder the operation of the contract.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 23rd January 2019
‘As we all get into the festive spirit you may well find yourself chatting to family or friends about their latest project. Some may ask for your opinion or advice. But don’t get carried away; remember the cautionary tale of Burgess v Lejonvarn before offering any free advice.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 18th December 2018
‘Liquidated damages (LD) clauses are a fixture of construction contracts. As we all know, they are a secondary obligations to pay an agreed sum of money, arising upon breach of a primary obligation of the contract. In the case of a construction contract, this will invariably be in the event of delay: the failure to complete the works by a specified date.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 3rd December 2018
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘An adjudication decision was made in favour of Synergy Gas Services against Northern Gas Heating on 8 August 2018. The present case concerns an application by Synergy Gas Services for enforcement of the adjudication award.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 3rd December 2018
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘With the recent Court of Appeal decision in Arcadis Consulting v AMEC [2018] EWCA Civ 2222 highlighting the risks involved in working under a letter of intent, it is worth having a recap on this area of law.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 5th November 2018
Source: hardwicke.co.uk
‘Mears Limited v Costplan Services (South East) Limited & Others [2018] EWHC 3363 (TCC) concerned the development of student accommodation in Plymouth. Mears Limited (“Mears”) alleged that there were substantial and material deviations from the contractual drawings and sought declarations preventing the certification of practical completion, the practical effect of which was to allow Mears to terminate its agreement to take a lease of the accommodation.’
4 New Square, 10th December 2018
Source: www.4newsquare.com
‘The government has ordered a review of building safety advice amid concerns that scores of tall buildings fitted with combustible cladding and insulation may have been missed by a testing programme following the Grenfell Tower fire.
The Guardian, 27th November 2018
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘Aspen Insurance UK Ltd & Liberty Mutual Insurance Europe Ltd v Sangster and Annand Ltd is a case that concerns a fire at a Scottish hotel, and liability under a Contractor’s Liability Insurance policy. It was heard by HHJ Waksman QC (as he then was) in the Commercial Court in June and, earlier this week, the Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 23rd November 2018
‘In North Midland Building Ltd v Cyden Homes, the Court of Appeal held that parties to a construction contract are free to apportion risk in the event of concurrent delay.’
Practical Law: Construction Blog, 7th November 2018
© Inner Temple Library 2025