The case of Odedra and another v Ball and another, [2012] EWHC 1790 (TCC), concerned an interim application for disclosure of an undisclosed expert report in circumstances where an expert valuer had prepared two reports but only one had been disclosed.

FIDIC, as is well known, are currently finalising a new amended version of the Yellow Book.

Grain engaged Shepherd under a framework agreement. A dispute arose as to whether an instruction to postpone works indefinitely was a variation. "Variation" was defined as...

In the case of A & Others v B & Anr, [2011] EWHC 2345, (Comm) Mr Justice Flaux had to consider an application to remove a sole arbitrator and set aside an award for serious irregularity on grounds that there were justifiable doubts as to the arbitrator’s impartiality.

The Court of Appeal in the case of West Tankers Inc v (1) Allianz Spa, (2) Generali Assicurazione Generali Spa, [2012] EWCA Civ 27 had to consider the Court’s power under section 66 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to order that judgment be entered in the terms of an arbitral award granting a negative declaration, i.e. a declaration that the successful party has no legal liability to the other party in respect of the subject matter of the arbitration.

The recent case of Heifer International Inc v (1) Helge Christiansen (2) Christiansen Arkitekter KS MAA PAR (3) Haslev-Hansson VVS (4) Stevns El-Service A/S (5) Listed El-Teknik APS [2007] EWHC 3015 (TCC) which came before HHJ Toulmin CMG QC provides a useful illustration of the difficulties that can ensue if parties do not clarify what is to happen in the event of a dispute, particularly when some of the parties are domiciled abroad.

VCL sought a Part 8 declaration in relation to the proper construction of a subcontract payment mechanism.

This simple answer to this question appears to be yes. Two recent decisions from Judges Coulson and Wilcox respectively seem to confirm this.

The perils of generative AI hallucinating and, in an effort to be helpful, making up new but false cases and/or citations are becoming increasingly well known.

When does a final account statement become conclusive under a construction contract? This case examines whether a document marked 'Draft' can trigger contractual conclusivity provisions, and explores the critical timing requirements for disputing final account figures. The decision provides essential guidance on how courts interpret final statements and the narrow window for challenging them under JCT contracts.

In the case of W Limited v M SDN BHD [2016] EWHC 422, Mr Justice Knowles of the Commercial Court considered an application to have two awards set aside on the grounds of apparent bias.

It is frequently the case that companies try and exclude as much liability as possible in their standard terms and conditions. The recent case of Regus (UK) Ltd v Epcot Solutions Ltd [2007] EWHC 938, which came before HHJ Mackie QC, demonstrates that there are clear limits on what can and cannot be so excluded.

You may be thinking about terminating a contract for various reasons.

The case of Glencore Agriculture BV (formerly Glencore Grain BV) v Conqueror Holdings Ltd provides a helpful illustration of the importance of reviewing the Notice requirements of the Contract strictly.

In Churchill v Merthyr Tydfil County Borough Council [2023] EWCA Civ 1416, the CA determined that the court had power to order unwilling parties to engage in alternative dispute resolution.

In the case of Ascon Contracting Limited -v- Alfred McAlpine Construction1, Judge Hicks said the word "'acceleration' tends to be bandied about as if it had

In the case of Parkwood Leisure Ltd v Laing O’Rourke Wales and West Ltd, [2013] EWHC 2665 (TCC), Mr Justice Akenhead had to consider whether or not collateral warranties can be construction contracts for purposes of Construction Act.

The government’s construction strategy requires that all government projects utilise a fully collaborative 3D computer model (Level 2) by 2016, with all project and asset information, documentation and data being electronic.

In the case of Desmond Edward Jenson and Sarah Jean Jenson v Spencer Roy Faux [2011] EWCA Civ 423, 13 April 2011, the question before the Court of Appeal was whether or not refurbishment works to a property can be so extensive, that the dwelling is then considered a new dwelling, as required by the DPA 1972 and subsequent case law.

The case of CGA Brown Ltd v Carr & Anor was an appeal from the judgement of HHJ Armitage QC against one part of Carr’s counterclaim regarding the roof. CGA Brown Ltd ("CGA") were builders who carried out works for the defendants ("Carr") at their house in Rochdale in 2003. Carr was awarded an on-account balance judgement in their favour for £224.29 plus costs