- Litigation / Dispute Resolution (9)
- Company/Commercial (7)
- Insurance/reinsurance (2)
- Planning (2)
- PPP/PFI/Commercial projects (2)
- Professional Indemnity/Negligence (2)
- Public Sector/Local Authority (2)
- Real Estate (2)
- Banking / Finance (1)
- Employment (1)
- Financial services (1)
- Information Technology (1)
- In-House (1)
- Tax (1)
- Transport (Including aviation and shipping) (1)
Sort By: Newest first | Oldest first
Delay is a common problem in construction projects and can have costly implications. Before electing to terminate on grounds of contractor delay, there are a number of factors that should be considered.
The National Audit Office notes that although private finance typically costs twice as much as public finance, it “can represent value for money”...
The recent case of ISG Construction Ltd v Seevic College  provides helpful guidance in relation to disputes involving non-payment which are referred to adjudication on ‘technicalities’.
The Autumn Statement delivered little of excitement for the real-estate sector.
In Flanagan and another v Greenbanks and Cross, the Court of Appeal provided guidance on assessing whether there had been a break in the chain of causation.
In AMEC Group v Secretary of State for Defence, the Technology and Construction Court highlighted the importance of drafting target cost clauses with precision.
The new year has brought with it two interesting decisions from the Technology and Construction Court that provide useful guidance on parties’ rights to adjudicate.
The High Court has decided that a collateral warranty provided by a building contractor to a tenant for a building was a ‘construction contract’.
Addleshaw Goddard reports on a Commercial Court judgment in relation to two preliminary issues arising in the context of AstraZeneca Insurance Co’s claim against its excess reinsurers.
The High Court has decided that a collateral warranty provided by a building contractor to a tenant for a building was an ‘construction contract’.
The government has launched its Right to Contest scheme.
For clients to be able to claim privilege over legal advice, the advice must have been given by a practising solicitor or barrister.
Ramifications of the recent ‘Bermuda Form’ judgment will undoubtedly cause insureds concern.