Our global pages
Close- Global home
- About us
- Global services/practices
- Industries/sectors
- Our people
- Events/webinars
- News and articles
- Eversheds Sutherland (International) Press Hub
- Eversheds Sutherland (US) Press Hub
- News and articles: choose a location
- Careers
- Careers with Eversheds Sutherland
- Careers: choose a location
Construction Foundation Newsletter October 2017
- United Kingdom
- Construction and engineering - Foundations
26-10-2017
Foundations will update you with details of what we think are the top court decisions of the previous few months and provide a summary of important legislation changes or proposals and a paper providing insight and guidance on a particular area of construction law and practice in the UK and internationally.
We hope you find our e-briefing useful and informative.
International Insights
The meaning and interpretation of gross negligence and wilful misconduct under English law
A paper, published by the Society of Construction Law, analysing the development and judicial treatment of gross negligence and wilful misconduct under English law. The paper also considers putative problems and scenarios that arise in connection with these terms.
UK Insights
Adjudicators, have you got your terms of engagement right? The many drafting lessons from Linnett v Harding
“The role of an adjudicator is one which can only be performed by an individual” stated Alexander Nissen QC in Linnett Ltd & Linnett v Mathew J Harding [2017]. Many drafting lessons must be learnt from the Technology and Construction Court’s decision, which we highlight in our overview of the case.
Top 3 Case Update
Contract interpretation: Uncertain terms
The Technology and Construction Court has again demonstrated in Vinci Construction UK Ltd v Beumer Group UK Ltd its reluctance to find contractual provisions void for uncertainty, particularly when the contracted works have already been performed.
Adjudication enforcement: CVAs
Whilst the judgment of Rossair Ltd v Primus Build Ltd [2017] (TCC) (unreported) does not demonstrate any new law, it identifies the difficulties parties will have when seeking to avoid enforcement of an adjudicator’s decision by the TCC in the circumstances of a Company Voluntary Agreement.
Adjudication proceedings: Recovery of cost
Whether a party can recover its costs of adjudication from the unsuccessful party is a question that has been considered on a number of occasions by the TCC. This decision provides some clarity in respect of the recovery of “reasonable costs” under the Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998.
Legislation update: 92nd second update of the Civil Procedure Rules
Proceedings in the Technology and Construction Court are governed by the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) and supplementary Practice Directions, both of which are frequently updated to adapt to the needs of parties. The 92nd update of the CPR came into force on 1 October 2017 and we summarise the provisions key to construction disputes.
This information is for guidance purposes only and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. Please refer to the full terms and conditions on our website.
- UK COVID testing - returning to the workplace part 3
- UK COVID vaccination - returning to the workplace part 2
- Decarbonising the UK’s Railways: will electric, hydrogen and batteries power the future of rail travel in the UK?
- Right to work checks: New requirements following COVID-19 lockdown
- Quarterly Fraud and Corruption Enforcement update - April 2021
