Melinda Parisotti
CommentThe last judgment
Today’s lesson comes from the book of Ecclesiastical and wrestles with questions of choice, free will, causation - and whether it’s OK to tell the odd porkie
CommentBack to basics with professional indemnity claims
There may be any number of clever ways to reduce the risk of professional indemnity claims. But why not start with the simplest?
CommentHow clients impose unreasonable terms on consultants
In austere times, clients are trying to transfer more of the risk onto desperate contractors. But to say consultants get off scot-free doesn’t tally with reality
CommentIn absentia: Jean Shaw vs James Scott Builders
This case is all about missing persons, missing contracts, missing drawings and missing deadlines. So no surprise when eventually it all turned around a missing email
CommentAn idiot’s guide to stupid questions
An implied term in a contract used to be defined as something that only a fool would ask about. Well, thanks to Lord Hoffman, it’s not quite that simple anymore
CommentContracts at the OK corral: Conflicting terms
If contract terms don’t amount to anything more than a succession of conflicting proposals, expect a legal showdown. What matters then is who fires the final shot …
CommentRecord keeping: The art of self-defence
Conscientious record-keeping can give you invaluable ammunition should you want to blame others when things go wrong. Worth every dull moment
CommentCollateral warranties: Lost and found
The use of the word ‘costs’ instead of ‘losses’ in collateral warranties can cause much confusion as to what exactly is being referred to and who is liable for what
CommentBeware what you wish for
An entire agreement clause proclaims that everything the parties have agreed is in the contract in front of them. But don’t forget that essential legal rule …
CommentPaying for whose mistakes?
If you settle a claim for something your subbie did, how sure can you be that you can then collect from it? Well, sit tight and watch the twists and turns of John F Hunt vs ASME …
CommentCaps: they’re the height of fashion
One way of limiting liability is to impose a curb on the amount that can be claimed under a contract. Hence caps are de rigueur. But, as this article makes clear, they’re far from simple
CommentWatch out, Homer Simpson
Judges interpret contracts with reference to what a reasonable person would understand under the circumstances. Just don’t expect any help if you claim stupidity
CommentYou can run …
Here's the story of an engineer being chased by a contractor after cracks appeared in a block of flats - and how it tried to lose its pursuer
CommentRush to judgment
A groundbreaking case has cut the two years for bringing contribution proceedings to recover damages. Not even Aer Lingus can move that fast …
CommentHere’s an idea …
Third-party rights have failed to dispose of collateral warranties. But maybe they could still do so – and eliminate the hated net contribution clause into the bargain
- Comment
A recipe for disaster
If danger is your bread and death your butter, you might be attracted by contracts containing fitness for purpose obligations. Otherwise, steer clear
CommentThat settles it
So, you’ve dispensed with the expensive lawyer and drawn up the final settlement yourself. Here’s how to make sure the agreement means what it says
- Comment
Twitch and its yours
There are many reasons why one side to a dispute might claim that there was no contract, but the courts will do their very best to prove them wrong
- Comment
The Santa clauses
Clients have the same approach to indemnity clauses as small children do to Christmas lists. It's understandable, perhaps, but it's hardly realistic …
- Comment
Beware their clause
An innocent-seeming sentence in a contract can have potentially fatal repercussions on your liabilities – as the following example demonstrates