This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes a case in which the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) made the first building liability order under the Building Safety Act 2022 (381 Southwark Park Road v Click St Andrews), a case in which the TCC refused to grant orders for information in connection with building liability orders (BDW Trading v Ardmore Construction), commentary on the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)’s response to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 report, release of the latest contracts in the Joint Contracts Tribunal (JCT)’s 2024 suite, an examination of the impact that the Arbitration Act 2025 (AA 2025) will have on emergency arbitrator provisions, a case in which the Commercial Court upheld a seller’s ability to claim in debt for the price of unpaid goods despite a retention of title provision in the contract of sale (CE Energy v Bashar), and publication by the Construction Industry Council (CIC) of the ‘Competence Framework for Sustainability in the Built Environment’.
EXISTING USER? SIGN IN CONTINUE READING GET A QUOTE
**Trials are provided to all ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK, Ireland and selected UK overseas territories and Caribbean countries. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
* denotes a required field
What is the difference between an appeal and a review?What is an appeal?An appeal in insolvency proceedings is no different to an appeal in normal litigation. An appeal will be allowed only if the appeal court is satisfied that the decision of the lower court was 'wrong' or 'unjust because of a
Financial clean break orders in family proceedingsDuty of the court to consider a clean breakAlthough there is no presumption in favour of there being a financial clean break between parties on divorce, the court is under a duty to consider whether it would be appropriate to exercise its powers so
Brussels I (recast)—domicile (Arts 4 and 63) [Archived]ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained.This Practice Note considers the general rule set out in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 1215/2012, Brussels I (recast) when determining the relevance of a defendant’s domicile to
Dispute Resolution analysis: The High Court has provided concise guidance as to how misrepresentation should be analysed when considering jurisdictional gateways. Under Article 5(3) of the Lugano Convention, in negligent misstatement cases, the place of the event giving rise to damage is normally
0330 161 1234