Negative declarations are becoming more and more popular it seems in construction particularly in adjudications.
Parties can inadvertently put themselves at risk by having discrepant practical completion provisions in building contracts and related commercial agreements.
In Construction Law we examined the scope of a builder's duty in tort not to cause 'pure economic loss' (or financial loss) in anticipation of the eagerly awaited decision in Linklaters Business Services v Sir Robert McAlpine.
The scope of a builder's duty in tort not to cause 'pure economic loss' has fast become one of the most talked about legal issues in the construction industry.
For the past ten years contracts providing for one party to pay not only its own costs but also the other side's costs in an adjudication (whatever the outcome) have been accepted in the construction industry. Why shouldn't this be the case?
"Credit insurance shortage will bring down SMEs" ran a headline in last month's Building (12 December). The report went on to highlight the reluctance of many banks and insurers to provide performance bonds for smaller contractors.
Credit insurance shortage will bring down SMEs" ran a headline in last month's Building (12 December). The report went on to highlight the reluctance of many banks and insurers to provide performance bonds for smaller contractors.
Getting someone else to fight your PFI dispute battles for you can be uncomfortable for both parties – name-borrowing may be a better solution all round.
The risks for contractors and subcontractors in PFI are not to be underestimated. The trick is to understand what these risks are, and to be bold about pricing for them.
With the OFT breathing down our necks, it would be wise not to get caught out on competition rules because you didn't know they existed.
Construction companies accused by the OFT will be wondering how bad things are going to be for them. Here's the answer.
Ian Yule discusses the legal issues regarding the project manager's duty to act fairly and impartially.
The concept of the management contract has come in for a lot of flak from a lot of critics in the past but the new JCT model is certainly the best in class.
If a home is built defectively, but the owners can still live in it, what compensation can they claim from the house builder for their loss of enjoyment?
If a home is built defectively, but the owners can still live in it, what compensation can they claim from the housebuilder for their loss of enjoyment?
The new Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 require the client to allow a mobilisation period to each principal contractor. We explain this new requirement and provide some practical advice to ensure compliance with this provision.
The RIBA standard form has been revised and two particularly irksome clauses have been amended. But don't go overboard. It is still biased in favour of architects. "Go bespoke" seems to be the message.
SOPC4: What are the main changes that affect the building contractor?