Construction operations meaning

Abbey Healthcare (Mill Hill) Ltd v Augusta 2008 LLP (formerly Simply Construct (UK) LLP) [2024] UKSC 23 What are the practical implications of this case? The court considered whether a contractor’s collateral warranty qualifies as a ‘construction contract’ under HGCRA 1996, s 104, thereby conferring a statutory right to adjudicate under HGCRA 1996, s 108. That status depended on whether the warranty was a contract ‘for... the carrying out of construction operations’ within HGCRA 1996, s 104(1)(a). The decision confirms that: a collateral warranty will only be a construction contract under HGCRA 1996, s 104(1)(a) where the contractor undertakes to the beneficiary an obligation to perform construction operations that is separate or distinct from its obligation to do so under the related building contract (or other appointment) a collateral warranty that simply warrants the contractor’s performance of its obligations to the employer under the building contract is not a contract for the carrying out of construction operations...

Clin v Walter Lilly & Co Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 136 What are the practical implications of this case? The judgment addresses the correct method for assessing if building operations within a conservation area designated under P(LBCA)A 1990, s 69 amount to ‘demolition’, thereby triggering the need for conservation area consent under P(LBCA)A 1990, s 74. The court confirmed that s 74 poses two distinct issues. First, is a building in a conservation area to be ‘demolished’ such that conservation area consent is necessary? Secondly, if the works do constitute demolition, should conservation area consent be granted? As to the first issue, the ruling makes plain that it is a quantitative assessment, answered by the scale of demolition, and excludes any qualitative appraisal of the effect on the character and appearance of the conservation area. The outcome will aid owners (and their advisers) and contractors planning works in conservation areas that entail an element of demolition to judge whether conservation area consent is needed. What...

Mergers The Commission cleared, at phase I, PAI Partners S.à rl’s acquisition of sole control of the Health Facilities Operations business of Vamed AG (M.11611)—see further, Midday Express The General Court published an order in Case T-1119/23 R-REVN, Lagardère v Commission, challenging the Commission’s request for information tied to its Vivendi/Lagardère probe (Articles 4(1) and 7(1) EMUR) (M.11184). The 13 June 2024 order records there is nothing further to adjudicate on in the application for interim measures in so far as it concerns documents sent to the Commission on 30 January 2024—see further, order NOTE—For all live merger investigations before the Commission, see further, EU mergers—ongoing cases tracker NOTE—For all live merger appeals before the General Court, see further, General Court appeals—ongoing cases tracker State aid A new appeal has been filed with the General Court in Case T-309/24, Hanseatic Energy Hub v Commission, against the Commission’s decision of 27 July 2023 in State aid Case SA.102163—Germany, Aid...

MF/2 MF/2 sits within the IET and Institution of Mechanical Engineers’ suite of Model Forms. It is intended for domestic (UK) or international agreements dealing solely with the supply of electrical, electronic or mechanical plant, and its full name is MF/2 Model Form of General Conditions of Contract for use in connection with home or overseas contracts for the supply of electrical, electronic or mechanical plant. The core terms have remained unchanged since 1999, save for amendment slips addressing the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (C(RTP)A 1999) and proposals to align it with MF/1 revision 5. Depending on the contractor’s scope and site characteristics, MF/2 can amount to a contract for ‘construction operations’ and fall within the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA 1996). It contains no adjudication provision and its payment terms do not satisfy those statutory controls—such provisions would need to be added by adapting comparable wording from MF/1. See Practice Notes: What is a construction contract under the HGCRA 1996? ...

This Practice Note examines when the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 (HGCRA 1996) is engaged on UK energy projects and highlights practical issues that can arise. It should be read together with Practice Note: What is a construction contract under the HGCRA 1996? The HGCRA 1996 applies to all construction contracts, as defined in the Act, across the following jurisdictions: England Wales Scotland When drafting a contract, parties should assess whether the on-site works fall within the scope of the HGCRA 1996 and, if so, ensure the terms are compliant. This discussion frequently surfaces on energy schemes where some or all elements of the works may sit within the statutory exclusions... Does the HGCRA 1996 apply to energy projects? For the HGCRA 1996 to apply, the agreement must meet the definition of a ‘construction contract’ in section 104—being a contract for carrying out (or arranging for, or providing labour for the carrying out of) ‘construction operations’ as set...

Practice Note This Practice Note consists of two strands created to help dispute resolution practitioners remain up to date with developments in case law that affect their field, or which influence civil litigation procedure more generally: selected forthcoming appeals to the Supreme Court are highlighted below; see Key forthcoming appeals to the Supreme Court—2022 summaries of significant appeal decisions in England and Wales (ie rulings of the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court and, where appropriate, certain judgments of the Competition Appeal Tribunal, Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, Court of Justice of the European Union), and ECtHR, which we have covered; see: Key forthcoming appeal cases—2022 You can navigate this content using the table of contents in the left-hand margin. Alternatively, search this tracker using [CTRL]+[F]. This material is not intended to be a comprehensive register of every appeal or major decision relevant to dispute resolution practitioners. Key forthcoming appeals to the Supreme Court—2022 Tort and negligence ...

1: Opening statement from senior management [ Name of organisation ] is dedicated to preventing modern slavery and human trafficking within its operations and supply chain, and applies the same exacting standards to itself and its partners. [ Insert high-level statement from person in senior management regarding the organisation's commitment to ensuring there is no slavery or trafficking within its supply chain and the effectiveness of any actions taken and/or any further actions to be taken. For example: [ Name of organisation ] adopts a zero tolerance stance on slavery and human trafficking, and we expect our supply chains to uphold the same approach. We are committed to establishing and maintaining robust systems and controls to tackle the risks of modern slavery within our business and across all commercial relationships, especially within our supply chains. Through our participation in [ insert details ], we also work with other organisations in the construction sector to promote good practice and to strengthen understanding and awareness of modern slavery and human trafficking...

Damages claim for misrepresentation, at common law and/or under the Misrepresentation Act 1967, s 2 The Claimant entered the contract in reliance on the Defendant’s assurances that every parcel of land needed for the scheme had already been secured and that former local residents supported the project. See Schedule X. The Claimant says this amounted to fraudulent misrepresentation: the assertion was untrue and the Defendant knew it. Alternatively, the statement is said to have been made negligently, as the Defendant lacked any reasonable basis for believing it was accurate. When the Contract was executed, a number of local residents refused to sell their land, and residents carried out protests within the Site for the duration of the works, which halted operations at the protest locations...

Such works may fall under section 105(1)(b) of the HGCRA 1996 Such works may fall within section 105(1)(b), which treats road maintenance as a construction operation covering the construction, alteration, repair, maintenance, extension, demolition or dismantling of works forming, or to form, part of land, including walls, roadworks, power lines, electronic communications apparatus, runways, docks, harbours, railways, inland waterways, pipelines, reservoirs, water mains, wells, sewers, industrial plant, and installations for land drainage, coast protection or defence. Alternatively, section 105(1)(e) catches operations integral to, preparatory for, or rendering complete those works, including site clearance, earth-moving, excavation, tunnelling, laying foundations, erecting, maintaining or dismantling scaffolding, site restoration, landscaping, and providing roadways and other access. No specific authority concerns these works, yet courts have often held that less orthodox activities are construction operations, for example: Baldwins Industrial Services plc v Barr: crane with driver hire held integral, preparatory to, or completing works under sections 105(1)(a) and (e). Some contracts are excluded from being a ‘construction...