Legal views – Page 107
-
Comment
Can I have some more?
Many PFI contracts are about to reach their first price review, when the contractor can apply for more money. This is likely to lead to some old friends falling out
-
CommentThe big squeeze
When the Bechtel boss told his people to do everything they could to disallow contractors’ costs, the contractors went to court. But was this the right move?
-
CommentCheck it out
The revamped JCT suite of contracts has finally begun to arrive. So what’s changed, what’s stayed the same – and what do you have to look out for?
-
CommentIdeal for multiple injuries
It’s hard to introduce a new defence in the middle of a trial, but in adjudication – being a quick first-aid for two parties in a punch-up – it’s the very opposite
-
CommentIt’s down to the developer
A half-baked rethink of the law is unlikely to increase project safety. Placing the burden of responsibility at clients’ doorsteps is a much more effective solution
-
CommentWorse than useless
The BPF’s consultancy agreement is a fine example of a one-sided contract that dumps extra work and unlimited risk on any consultant foolish enough to sign it
-
CommentBang out of order
When a dodgy builder was jailed for fleecing customers, he got an ASBO into the bargain. What the dastardly felon also got was a dose of rough justice
-
CommentFun, frolics and forms
The JCT has revamped and extended its range of standard contracts. If you can get past the swanky yellow covers, you’ll find all kinds of interesting changes inside
-
CommentYou know it makes sense
The British Property Federation has produced one short, simple and fair consultancy agreement for every profession. What do you think its reception will be?
-
CommentToo much to ask for?
Be warned: there’s an extremely architect-friendly clause hidden in RIBA SFA/99. So friendly, and so hidden, that it has been ruled ‘unusual and onerous’
-
-
CommentCDM: An audit
The Health and Safety Executive has just recommended changes to the CDM regulations. So the first question we should ask is: will they do any good?
-
Comment
Welcome to castle Bolkestein
The proposed European Union services directive, or Bolkestein’s monster, as it’s known, could produce a playing field with so many bumps that standards suffer
-
Comment
An old battleground
The hardy perennial of liquidated damages popped up again in a recent court action, which turned on whether the clause was a penalty, and unenforceable, or not
-
Comment
How do you work this thing?
In theory, the Information and Consultation Regulations mean firms face fines of up to £75k if they fail to consult staff – but what will it mean in practice?
-
CommentShow me the money
We kick off this Construction Act review special by asking why the DTI’s consultation document does not properly address subcontractors’ right to get hold of their cash
-
CommentAway with the fairies
The DTI thinks that, with a sprinkling of fairy dust, adjudicators can rewrite laws and be made impartial. Believe that, and you might as well believe in Tinkerbell
-
Comment
What the review missed
Concerns about the statutory payment and adjudication provisions in the Construction Act are well founded, but the review fails to deal with all of them head on
-
CommentWhen less isn’t more
When it comes to reforming the Construction Act, the instinct to resist meddling is correct in many cases, but has done nothing to address a major failing
-
Comment
A victory of sorts
Insurance companies may have failed in an attempt to stop payouts to workers with a lung condition caused by asbestos, but they did manage to limit compensation