Shifting Contractual Risks And Managing Electronic Contracts

Summary

In this Insight, Shy Jackson takes a look at the decision of John Sisk and Son Limited v Capital & Centric (Rose) Limited [2025] EWHC 594 (TCC) where the court had to grapple with interpreting a contract which was kept on a USB drive as well as a bound hard copy, where the key provisions were in a spreadsheet, which included hidden columns, and where the electronic version included a document which did not appear in the paper version.

Not surprisingly, there was an argument between the parties about how it all worked and which party was responsible for the risk of existing structures. In an adjudication, the contractor was unsuccessful and was held responsible for that risk. The contractor therefore commenced a Part 8 claim, seeking a declaration about the interpretation of the contract provisions.