Consultant meaning

This Checklist This Checklist identifies the principal terms to weigh up within a consultancy agreement. It draws attention to points affecting the customer, matters impacting the consultant, and considerations shared by both sides for incorporation into a consultancy agreement. The Checklist supports both consultant and customer as they assess and bargain over a consultancy agreement, effectively guiding review and negotiation throughout the process. See also: Taking instructions for a consultancy agreement—checklist...

This Checklist offers a proposed set of key points to weigh up when assessing whether a construction agreement—be that a building contract, a consultant appointment or a collateral warranty—can be assigned. It also sets out the practical steps to be taken to complete an assignment of the benefit of a construction contract from one party to another. Does the construction contract contain assignment provisions? Construction agreements commonly include an explicit clause addressing the parties’ rights to assign under it. Where the contract says nothing about assignment, either side may assign the contract without limitation or constraint. In some cases, the contract will expressly bar assignment by one or both parties. Usually, the employer is not wholly barred from assigning; however, there is often a cap on how many assignments can occur without the other party’s consent (see further on restrictions below). See Practice Note: Assignment in construction contracts. Are there any restrictions on the right to assign? Construction...

This checklist sets out the key issues to consider when reviewing a PCG on behalf of a contractor who is being asked to provide a PCG. The terms 'contractor' and 'employer' are used, but the same principles also extend to arrangements between a contractor and a sub-contractor, or between an employer/contractor and a consultant. As PCGs are commonly bespoke, the particular context should be taken into account when assessing a PCG. For a fuller discussion of these points, see Practice Note: Parent company guarantees (PCGs) in construction—drafting and negotiation issues. Is the contractor obliged under the Building Contract to provide a PCG? If not, there is no requirement for the contractor to deliver one. Nevertheless, a contractor might still agree to give a PCG to reassure the employer and to create or sustain a good working relationship. Do the contractor’s internal policies allow the issue of PCGs, and is any approval necessary? Many businesses would opt to give a PCG rather than a performance bond,...

Under Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679, the General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) Under the Assimilated Regulation (EU) 2016/679, namely the UK GDPR, some organisations must designate an individual to serve as their data protection officer (DPO). The position can be taken up internally, e.g. by an employee of the organisation, or arranged externally, e.g. by a consultant retained under a service contract. This will help you determine whether your organisation needs to appoint a DPO to meet the requirements of the UK GDPR. If your organisation operates in jurisdictions outside the UK, you will need to check whether law or regulations require you to appoint a DPO in any of those jurisdictions. For more information on the role of the...

Oliver v Oliver [2024] EWHC 2289 (Ch) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment stands as an uncommon instance of a Will being set aside for both want of testamentary capacity and undue influence despite professional preparation, the court having the testator’s recorded instructions, and a certificate obtained from the testator’s GP. It merits close reading for its survey of authority and its demonstration of the application of legal principles in real cases, including where a defendant declines to engage with the proceedings. The court concluded that William lacked testamentary capacity after a detailed evaluation of his medical notes (including a post-mortem), expert opinion from a Consultant in Old Age Psychiatry, and witness evidence. Although a determination on undue influence was not required, the reasoning still provides a helpful illustration of a successful claim. Jane adduced substantial material evidencing Rodney’s domination of William, which encompassed restricting his contact with other relatives and influencing his medical treatment. Rodney induced William to cease his prescribed treatment and instead...

In this issue: Building safety JCT contracts Procurement in construction Scots law Tort law Litigation Contract law Alternative dispute resolution Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content New Q&As New Webinar Construction trackers Building safety Building Safety Act 2022—application of the ‘just and equitable’ test for remediation contribution orders (Grey GR v Edgewater) Grey GR Ltd Partnership v Edgewater (Stevenage) [2025] Lexis Citation 276 saw the FTT examine section 124 of the Building Safety Act 2022, a provision enabling remediation contribution orders where the tribunal finds it ‘just and equitable’. In this piece, Marcus Birch, a consultant at BCLP, reviews the decision, delivering long-awaited clarity on how the tribunal intends to apply the ‘just and equitable’ threshold in fire safety disputes featuring numerous respondents. Refer to News Analysis: Building Safety Act 2022—application of the ‘just and equitable’ test for remediation contribution orders for further...

Bartolomucci (a protected party suing by his litigation friend James M Bartolomucci) v Circle Health Group Ltd [2025] EWHC 529 (KB) What are the practical implications of this case? When you undergo private medical treatment in England and Wales, the usual position is that you sign a written agreement with the hospital, yet there is no easily identifiable written contract with the consultant surgeon or the anaesthetist. If a patient alleges harm caused by a substandard level of care by a consultant during a procedure at a private hospital (here, a consultant anaesthetist), the most obvious defendant is the consultant personally. The private hospital ought to have verified that such consultants carried appropriate insurance (as it did here), and regardless of whether a contract exists between patient and consultant, the consultant remains susceptible to a tort claim. But what if, as happened here, the anaesthetist’s indemnifier declines indemnity? The claimant commenced Part 8 proceedings against the private hospital, seeking declarations that the hospital, under its contract, assumed responsibility for...

Disputes frequently arise on construction projects over the level of care a contractor or consultant must exercise in relation to design. Typically, the contractor or consultant will seek to avoid taking on a 'fitness for purpose' duty for the design, whether stated expressly or arising by implication. This Practice Note considers what the so‑called 'fitness for purpose' obligation involves, who is bound by it and who is not, where it originates, and why contractors and consultants prefer not to accept it. It also sets out example clauses and evaluates whether a contractor should agree to them. The precise volume of design carried out under a contract or appointment can fluctuate, yet the standard applied to that design remains consistent across the board. Where does the fitness for purpose obligation come from? The fitness for purpose obligation stems from legislation on product liability and the standards to be achieved when goods, materials and/or services are supplied...

This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews the standard form novation agreements issued by the City of London Law Society (CLLS) and the Construction Industry Council (CIC). Novation is now widespread on construction schemes. It arises in various contexts and has, in particular, become routine on design and build procurements. For more on novation generally, see Practice Note: Novation in construction projects. Parties often adopt their own bespoke novation agreements, so numerous versions circulate. In 2004, two standard forms appeared—one from the CLLS construction committee and one from the CIC. The CIC later released an ‘ab initio’ form in November 2018, and a second edition of the ‘switch’ form in July 2021. Each agreement is a brief, straightforward document that avoids unnecessary provisions, though they adopt different approaches to novating the consultant. They do, however, each tackle the key issues arising from Blyth & Blyth v Carillion, and the ‘no loss’ argument (see Practice Notes: Novation in construction...

Disclosure: an important and integral part of litigation Disclosure obliges parties to set out every document within their control that relates to the issues in dispute, share this with the other participants, and permit opponents to inspect them. It is a mandatory and central step in litigation, capable of winning or losing a case. Under the rules for disclosure in claims in the Business and Property Courts (see regime 2 below), it is regarded as vital to the just determination of civil proceedings (CPR PD 57AD, para 2.1). The exercise consists of locating and providing documents relevant to the live issues. In the conduct of litigation, the Court of Appeal observed in 2014 that the public interest lies in all relevant evidence reaching the court, whilst acknowledging that the duty intrudes upon a litigant’s privacy and confidentiality. When defendants failed to obey disclosure orders, a judge remarked in 2022 that there is no option to opt out; the task must be undertaken and explained, and that remains so even...

Delete clause 3.6 of Precedent: Consultancy agreement—company and individual—pro-client and replace it with the following clauses 3.6 and 3.7: 3.6 How you organise your work is for you alone to determine, and you shall perform your duties as data protection officer (DPO) (as described in the Schedule) in an independent and self-directed manner at all times. You will not be given (and the Company [ and its Group Companies ] will not attempt to give you) any directions or instructions whatsoever concerning the performance or exercise of those duties. 3.7 Subject to clause 3.6, you shall give proper consideration to the reasonable requests of the [ Board OR Chief Executive ] from time to time and, where reasonably practicable, as appropriate, properly work and co-operate with any employee, worker, agent or other consultant of the Company [ or any Group Company ] in the provision and delivery of the Services. Insert the subsequent provisions in Precedent: Consultancy agreement—company and individual—pro-client as new clauses 3.14 and 3.15...

Stop press: The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (Commencement No 6 and Transitional and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2026, SI 2026/82 bring the remaining elements of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (DUAA 2025) into operation. Measures addressing subject access requests, legitimate interests, purpose limitation, automated decision-making, international transfers and enforcement apply from 5 February 2026, while the provisions on penalty notices and complaints apply from 19 June 2026. For further details, see Practice Note: Data (Use and Access) Act 2025—employment implications. This Precedent will be revised shortly to reflect these updates. This Agreement is entered into on [ insert date ] Parties [ Name of Company ], a company incorporated in England and Wales with registered number [ insert company number ] whose registered office is at [ insert address ] (the Company); and [ Name of consultant ], of [ insert address ] (‘ you ’). Background (A) You operate in the business of [ insert description...

Effective from [ insert date ], this statement of investment principles applies. 1 Statement of investment principles 1.1 Purpose of statement This document outlines the principles that steer decisions on investing the assets of the [ insert name ] Pension Scheme (the Scheme). It is published by the Trustees of the [ insert name ] Pension Scheme (the Trustees) to meet the requirements of the Pensions Act 1995, s 35. 1.2 Review The statement will be assessed each year. The Trustees may conduct an ad hoc review at any time if they consider there has been a material change in investment policy, or any other circumstances affecting the Scheme. 1.3 Advice The Trustees have received and evaluated written advice on the contents of this statement in a letter from [ insert name of investment consultant or actuary ]. [ insert name ] have confirmed to the Trustees that, through their ability and practical experience in financial matters, and with appropriate knowledge...