• No easy escape from negligence trial for fire engineer (Avantage (Cheshire) v (5) WSP UK Limited)

    Avantage (Cheshire) Limited and others v GB Building Solutions Limited (In Administration)
    and others [2022] EWHC 171 (TCC)

    Construction law barrister James Davison has reviewed the case of Avantage (Cheshire) Limited and others v GB Building Solutions Limited (In Administration) and others [2022] EWHC (TCC) for Lexis®PSL.

    View Article
  • High Court considers exclusion of abatement and the scope of section 49(2) of the Sale of Goods Act 1979

    3PB’s Jakob Reckhenrich has analysed the case of Readie Construction Limited v Geo Quarries Limited [2021] EWHC 3030 (QB) and identifies that the judgment of this case will now make it easier for a party to bring itself within section 49(2) of the Act, showing that the time for payment is other than the day of delivery may well be sufficient to show that “the price is payable on a day certain irrespective of delivery”. Secondly, the courts may be more willing than they once were, to construe a no set-off clause as extending to abatement (particularly where the word “reduction” is used).

    View Article
  • The limits of disclosure under the pilot—what you won’t get even if you ask (Curtiss v Zurich Insurance plc)

    Curtiss and others v Zurich Insurance plc (t/a Zurich Building Guarantee and Zurich Municipal) and another [2021] EWHC 1999 (TCC)

    Construction law barrister James Davison has reviewed the case of Curtiss and others v Zurich Insurance plc (t/a Zurich Building Guarantee and Zurich Municipal) and another [2021] EWHC 1999 (TCC) for Lexis®PSL.

    View Article
  • The UK’s New Building Product Safety Regulator - Some Reflections from Abroad

    The UK’s New Building Product Safety Regulator - Some Reflections from Abroad

    Specialist construction law barrister Philip Bambagiotti comments on the UK's new Building Product Safety Regulator.

    View Article
  • Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (in liquidation) v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd [2020] USC 25, or ‘‘kicking the door wide open’’

    3PB construction and commercial/insolvency barrister John Jessup predicted on Tuesday June 9 at the 3PB construction law webinar that the Supreme Court may push open the door left slightly ajar by Lord Justice Coulson at the Court of Appeal in the case of Bresco v Lonsdale [2019] EWCA Civ 27.

    View Article
  • A Guide to Selecting and Using an Expert Witness in Construction Claims

    3PB construction barrister James Davison – together with Anne Wright of Lawrence Stephens – has re-published a guide to selecting and using an expert witness in construction claims. The guide “To be or not to be an expert witness”, which was originally published in Construction Law, provides practical guidance on selecting an expert witness, and advises witnesses how to behave once appointed.

    ‘The expert witness’s primary duty is to help the court and this duty overrides any duty which experts may have to those who are instructing or paying them’ (see the Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (CPR) r 35.3 – ‘An Expert’s Duties’). The expert witness is not the decision maker – the role is to provide information to assist a third party – judge, arbitrator, and adjudicator – to decide a case before them. The danger of conflating the two roles has been well aired in case law. Similarly, case law on what constitutes expert evidence and what does not, and commentary on where expert evidence has gone awry, is rather too plentiful.

    This excellent guide gives some background on the use of experts in construction, and provides practical pointers to both the appointment of an expert and to the expert, once retained.

    View Article
  • COVID-19 and “Force Majeure” of contracts? – Not so Fast

    COVID-19 and “Force Majeure” of contracts – Not so fast! Philip Bambagiotti takes a contrary view to the new group-think which seems to reach for ‘force majeure’ as the first answer to the challenge to performance of existing contracts posed by the Covid-19 crisis.

    View Article
  • 3PB's Nick Kaplan reviews the decision in Grove Developments: for the Adjudication Society in an article called "Unloosening or tightening the Construction Act’s Gordian Knot?"

    In Grove Developments, two of the construction world’s most esteemed Judges have, in their departing decisions before moving on to pastures new, now attempted to unloosen the Gordian Knot created by the amended Construction Act and Edwards-Stuart J’s decision in ISG.

    This article seeks to assess the degree to which the decisions in Grove have unloosened that knot, or merely entangled us in other, related, difficulties. Further, it looks briefly at the recent decision of Stuart-Smith J in Davenport Builders which may, to mix my classical metaphors, indicate a way to chart a course between the Scylla of ISG and the Charybdis of Grove.

    View Article
  • Grove Developments – Will Smash and Grab now Crash and Burn

    Nicholas Kaplan analyses the decision in Grove Developments v S&T: will Smash and Grab now Crash and Burn?

    View Article
  • When claims consultants become the lawyers, or do they?

    Paul Newman, Barrister and Mediator of 3PB writes an informative article on when claims consultants become lawyers (or do they)?

    View Article
  • In theory--CDM Regulations and novation

    Construction law: The CDM Regulations 2015 and novated designer appointments - an update for Lexis Nexis by Seb Oram of 3PB Barristers.

    View Article
  • DM Regulations 2015 and their effect and on the practical issues that they raise for the Construction and Engineering sectors

    On the anniversary of the CDM Regulations 2015 coming into force, Seb Oram presents a LexisNexis webinar on their effect and on the practical issues that they raise for the Construction and Engineering sectors.

    View Article