Legal views – Page 27
-
CommentLegal - Backwards or forwards?
Victoria Peckett considers the relative merits of prospective and retrospective delay analysis, in the light of recent court rulings
-
CommentLegal - for fools rush in...
While the Carillion disaster highlights the need for action on retentions, says Francis Ho, we must not rush into legislation
-
CommentLegal - the sense of an ending
When terminating a contract it is vital to closely follow the procedure in the text
-
CommentCase in focus: Off on a frolic?
Having raised specific questions, had the adjudicator breached natural justice by coming to a conclusion that was different from the answers provided by the parties?
-
CommentLegal: All together now
It’s time to draw together the scattered pieces of construction law to form a uniform construction code, say Rudi Klein and Philip Harris
-
CommentIt ain't put your feet up time
Just because an employer’s own actions have delayed completion does not necessarily let the contractor off the hook, explains Ian Yule
-
CommentLegal: Beware the robots
In the third of our series on new technology, James Worthington considers the legal issues surrounding the use of robotics on the construction site
-
CommentLegal blog: When things go phut
With the Construction Act up for review, it’s the perfect moment to add a key item from Latham’s wish list that got left out last time: compulsory project bank accounts. Tony Bingham explains
-
CommentLegal blog: Cyber Security - building services
While building infrastructure and services can help improve security, they may also offer vulnerable points for cyber attack. By Paul Glass of Taylor Wessing’s cyber security team
-
CommentLegal: Not quite the last word
Robert Akenhead explains why final isn’t always final – so make sure your contract’s finality provisions are clear and explicit
-
CommentLegal: Claiming for remedial work
If remedial works are needed, what steps should be taken to recover the costs?
-
CommentCase in focus: Performance bonds
Was the guarantor liable under a bond where the contractor became insolvent following termination of the contract?
-
CommentLegal: Who gets the money?
When a main contractor goes bust, can the courts assume that the employer has set up a retention fund for subcontractors – even when it has not?
-
CommentLegal: Dissecting delay
Tony Bingham recommends two new books for 2018. Both deal with delay and disruption in construction, but in very different ways
-
CommentLegal: Carillion - no turning back
It’s time for a radical rethink on payment security and procurement, says Rudi Klein – the Carillion business model is bust
-
CommentLegal blog: What should Carillion subcontractors do next?
Firms owed money by the failed contractor need to act quickly to have any hope of recovering any money
-
CommentLegal: BIM - it's what you do with it
Peter Hibberd cautions that BIM’s effectiveness in preventing disputes depends on good practice in tackling known issues
-
CommentLegal: Carillion and a shift in risk
Given that Carillion’s abandoned contracts have been partly blamed for its demise, any firms that pick these up should ensure they renegotiate the risk balance before signing a deal
-
CommentChelsea FC: Shining a light on neighbourly rights
Hammersmith and Fulham Council’s decision has implications for Rights to Light
-
CommentLegal blog: Acting on sexual harassment
With sexual harassment under the spotlight, employers need to be aware of the procedures to follow if an allegation arises