Legal Comment – Page 99
-
CommentThe accidental criminal
New trading regulations that target misleading marketing are there to catch the rogues. But their remit is so broad you could inadvertently commit an offence, too
-
CommentLiving in sin: Haden Young vs Laing O'Rourke Midlands
The dangers of contractor and subcontractor co-habiting out of wedlock were highlighted when Hayden Young went to work for Laing O’Rourke on Coventry City’s Ricoh arena
-
CommentCome again: Energy Performance of Buildings Directive
The EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive hasn’t had much of an impact so far. So now the EU is rushing out a more ambitious successor …
-
CommentLook who’s footing the bill
Using outsiders to bankroll disputes has been treated with some suspicion by the courts. But the construction industry would be well advised to explore it
-
CommentYoghurt in a pea soup
Guess what? We’ve got another case in which the parties started work on the basis of a letter of intent. The slight difference in this case is that it concerns Müller twin pots
-
CommentIdentity crises
Although name borrowing may seem like a simple concept, it can lead to conflicting issues for all parties involved
-
CommentRICS consultancy form: On surprisingly good form
The new crop of RICS standard contract are about to make quantity surveyors’ lives a lot easier
-
CommentI is for indemnity
The A-Z of construction law - Our instant course in legal concepts continues by asking what exactly is an indemnity and how would you spot one in a contract?
-
CommentConcurrent delays: Doing the splits
The City Inn case throws up a logical approach to granting extensions of time due to concurrent delays – if the delay has two causes, then why not apportion responsibility accordingly?
-
CommentMe and my pod
The podcast was fun. First of its kind here at Building. Rudi Klein and yours truly were interviewed by Building’s ace interviewer, Chloë McCulloch, about the government’s changes to payment rules.
-
CommentLiability: Strictly speaking
Do you know the difference between strict and absolute duties and no-fault liability? If not, then read on before you commit yourself to undertaking either
-
CommentThings to take into account
Project bank accounts are in the spotlight again. If you use one yourself, make sure you’re aware of all the pros and cons, particularly with regard to insolvency
-
CommentThat bubble, reputation
What happened at BAE should have us all thinking about not just the legality of what we do but the morality. Our good names can so easily be damaged, even lost
-
Comment
The villains of the piece
Rudi Klein So should the 112 firms accused by the OFT be hung, drawn and quartered? Or were there some mitigating circumstances …
-
CommentDon’t get your knickers in a twist
In its enthusiasm to paint our industry as a bunch of dodgy operators, the Office of Fair Trading has got the whole cover pricing and bid rigging business mixed up
-
CommentExclusion clauses: A chink of light
Are exclusion clauses enforceable? Hitherto, the courts have shed little light on the matter, but a recent Court of Appeal decision makes things much clearer
-
CommentAre you listening?
Put four fabulous speakers in a room and get some of the country’s top adjudicators to sit down in front of them. The result is a fascinating conference we can all learn from
-
CommentNEC: Smooth operator
The Olympic Delivery Authority has chosen the NEC contract in the hope that it will keep the job moving efficiently. But it will only work if it’s well enough resourced
-
CommentConfidentiality in mediation: Do the decent thing
It really can’t be stressed enough that what goes on between consenting parties in a mediation is nobody’s business but theirs. If you don’t believe that, consider the following case
-
CommentA sackload of trouble
Can a party to an adjudication introduce evidence that wasn’t previously disclosed if it fundamentally alters the original claim? The answer used to be no, but a recent judgment may have reversed this