Case Updates

11
Dec
2018

High Court awards damages against guarantor in GPP Big Field LLP v Solar EPC Solutions SL [2018] EWHC 2866

Background: GPP Big Field LLP (“GPP”) was the Employer to 5 Engineering, Procurement and Construction contracts (“EPC contracts”) to build solar plants in the UK. The Contractor, Prosolia UK Ltd, is currently insolvent and therefore GPP sued its parent company, Solar EPC Solutions SL (“Solar”) as guarantor in order to recover both liquidated damages (“LDs”)…

Read more...


19
Nov
2018

No “philosopher’s stone”- Court of Appeal confirms TCC’s decision in Grove Developments Ltd v S&T (UK) Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2448

The Court of Appeal has upheld Coulson J’s (as he then was) decision in the TCC[i]. Post Views: 65

Read more...


1
Nov
2018

Court of Appeal rescues Arcadis Consulting Ltd in Arcadis Consulting (UK) Ltd v AMEC [2018] EWCA Civ 2222

Background: AMEC BCS Ltd (“AMEC”) was a concrete sub-contractor on both the Wellcome Centre (“Project 1”) and Castlepoint car park (“Project 2”) construction projects. It engaged Arcadis Consulting (UK) Ltd (“Arcadis”) to carry out design work to both these projects. The parties first agreed terms in relation to Project 1 on 8 November 2001 (“the…

Read more...


11
Sep
2018

Collateral warranty claim struck out in Swansea Stadium Management Company Ltd v City & County of Swansea [2018] EWHC 2192 (TCC)

On 15 August 2018 O’Farrell J struck out part of Swansea Stadium Management Company’s claim against Interserve Construction Ltd in their application for summary judgment. Juli Lau, an Associate and commercial contracts specialist and Alexandra Bellis, a Trainee Solicitor in our Disputes Resolution team, consider the implications for construction contractors from the partial summary judgment awarded by the Technology and Construction Court.

Read more...


15
Aug
2018

Can a lead consultant be responsible for works carried out by others? Midlothian Council v Bracewell Sterling Architects [2018] CSIH 21

Authors: Tola Odedoyin and Juli Lau This is a Scottish decision, which while not binding in England and Wales, provides insight into the interpretative approach the Court may take when faced with a similar situation in this jurisdiction. Post Views: 31

Read more...


24
May
2018

No Oral Modification at the Supreme Court: Rock Advertising Ltd v MWB Business Exchange Centres Ltd [2018] UKSC 24

Author: Juli Lau and Alexandra Bellis Following the appeal of the Rock Advertising Limited decision from the Court of Appeal in 2016, we analyse the judgment handed down on 16 May by the Supreme Court. This case is good news for employers and clients who are party to construction contracts – it provides protection against…

Read more...


16
May
2018

PPP contracts – how to avoid bringing long-term contracts from the boardroom into the courtroom

PPP contracts – how to avoid bringing long-term contracts from the boardroom into the courtroom The jury is once again out on whether PFI contracts are worth entering into or whether the government should put an end to such arrangements. This unfavourable attention comes hot on the heels of construction giant Carillion’s insolvency in January…

Read more...


10
May
2018

Changes to PAS 91:2013+A1:2017

Following the last update of PAS 91 in 2013, at the end of 2017, the British Standards Institute published the long-awaited amendment to the PAS 91 Prequalification Questionnaire used by many public sector construction clients.  The amendments have been made to ensure that PAS aligns with new legislation, in particular the Public Contracts Regulations 2015…

Read more...


13
Mar
2018

Ziggurat (Claremont Place) LLP v HCC International Insurance Company Plc [2017] EWHC 3286 (TCC)

This case serves as a reminder to all parties to a contract as to the nature of guarantee bonds and the importance of understanding the rationale for making amendments to standard forms. Post Views: 44

Read more...


29
Jan
2018

Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust v ATOS IT Services UK Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 2196

Author: Justin Mendelle and Tola Odedoyin It is common for parties to a construction contract to apportion risk and limit liability by specifying the damages that one party will be obliged to pay to the other in the event of a breach.  However, it is by no means straightforward to always capture commercial intentions with precise…

Read more...