TCC meaning

STOP PRESS: With effect from 24 February 2025, the principal provisions of the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023) are operative. Any procurement initiated on or after that date must follow PA 2023, while procurements started under the earlier regimes—the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016, the Concession Regulations 2016, and the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011—must continue to be procured and managed in line with those rules. Refer to Practice Note: Introduction to the Procurement Act 2023—PA 2023. PCR 2015 as assimilated law PCR 2015 are EU-derived domestic legislation and are therefore treated as assimilated law under sections 2 and 6 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. For practical guidance on the status and interpretation of assimilated law, see Practice Note: Assimilated law...

This Checklist explains the requirements and principal steps necessary to secure compliance, by a claimant or a defendant, with the second edition of the Pre-Action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes (the Protocol). Parties involved in a dispute are expected to adhere to it before commencing proceedings in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC). It prescribes what should occur prior to starting a claim in the TCC. Does the Protocol apply? The parties should first verify that the Protocol is applicable to their dispute—see Practice Note: Construction Pre-Action Protocol—application, exclusions and objectives. Under the Protocol, the claimant may, with unanimous written agreement of all intended parties to the proceedings, dispense with the pre-action process. What does the claimant need to do to comply? ...

Prepared in partnership with 4 Pump Court. This checklist sets out the principal issues you need to consider upon receiving an adjudicator’s decision. The main issues At the very outset, there are three principal points that warrant attention: are there any mistakes in the decision that could be corrected under the slip rule? is the outcome capable of enforcement? is the outcome acceptable, or is a final determination required and, if so, can this be pursued through Part 8 proceedings? Enforceability Issues It is important to assess whether the decision is enforceable, or whether it may properly be challenged. Please note that the grounds for challenging an adjudicator’s decision are limited—see Practice Note: Resisting enforcement of an adjudication decision...

In this issue: Electricity and gas market regulation and licensing Renewable energy Conventional power, waste to energy, biomass, and CHP projects Hydrogen, CCUS and emerging technologies Energy disputes Air emissions, efficiency, and climate change International energy LexTalk®Energy: a Lexis®Nexis community New and updated content Dates for your diary Trackers Energy resources on Lexis+® Daily and weekly news alerts Electricity and gas market regulation and licensing DESNZ confirms enduring governance for Smart Secure Electricity Systems DESNZ has issued its response to the 2025 consultation on enduring governance for the Smart Secure Electricity Systems (SSES) Programme, confirming that Elexon, through the Balancing and Settlement Code (BSC), will establish new Technical and Security Governance Groups to guide the technical and security frameworks that enable consumer-led flexibility. Using powers in section 245 of the Energy Act 2023, the government will amend the BSC so Elexon can run these groups as BSC Panel sub-committees and...

In this issue: Contract law Building safety Litigation Arbitration Tax for construction lawyers Standard form contracts Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Contract law Employer deemed out of time in issuing a notification on the Monday after a Sunday deadline (My Contracts v 74 Hamilton Terrace) In My Contracts Ltd v 74 Hamilton Terrace Freehold Ltd [2024] EWHC 2896 (TCC), the TCC issued a declaration at the contractor’s request concerning the construction of a clause that imposed a deadline for the employer to notify costs for which the contractor was responsible. The court concluded the employer missed the deadline by serving the notice on the Monday immediately after the final day for service, which had fallen on a Sunday. Central to the decision was that the clause made no provision for the period to be calculated by reference to ‘Business Days’. See News Analysis: Employer...

In this issue: Standard form contracts Building safety Expert witnesses Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Standard form contracts CLLS publishes 2024 edition of Letter of Intent The CLLS has released the refreshed 2024 edition of its Letter of Intent. Our commentary reviews the revisions made. See News Analysis: City of London Law Society publishes 2024 edition of Letter of Intent. Court refuses declaratory relief in JCT termination payment dispute (Shaylor v Valesecure) In Shaylor Group Ltd (in administration) v Valesecure Property Ltd (in liquidation) [2024] EWHC 750 (TCC), the Technology and Construction Court declined to issue declarations regarding the contractor’s right to payment after the termination of a JCT-based contract. In doing so, the court explored noteworthy issues of contractual interpretation, including the methodology for assessing sums owed to the contractor post-termination and the impact of an ineffective assignment by the employer. See News Analysis:...

This Practice Note offers a beginner’s overview of construction disputes, intended for trainee solicitors and others unfamiliar with the area. It outlines what a construction disputes lawyer does, the disputes that frequently occur on projects, and gives a primer on adjudication, dispute boards, proceedings in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC), construction arbitration and alternative dispute resolution (ADR). It also considers the nature of disputes that routinely emerge on construction projects and the role undertaken by the disputes lawyer. We suggest reading Practice Note: Construction law—new starter guide, which sets out the core principles of construction law and the characteristics of construction projects, before tackling this note. The content of this Practice Note is also available as a PowerPoint deck with speaker notes—see: Introduction to construction disputes—training materials. You might also consider Practice Note: Dispute Resolution—new starter guide, which addresses dispute resolution more broadly. The work of a construction disputes lawyer Construction lawyers handling disputes (often described as contentious or back-end practice) are typically asked to support clients...

This Practice Note This Practice Note examines how case management is conducted in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC), by reference to the provisions of CPR 60, CPR PD 60, and the Technology and Construction Court Guide. As these materials supplement the general provisions found elsewhere in the CPR, it should be read together with wider guidance on case management, in particular: the court’s array of case management powers under CPR 3, and case management more generally—see Practice Note: Case management of civil claims under the CPR, and Case management—checklist multi-track case management—see Practice Notes: Multi-track—case management, and Multi-track—case management conference (CMC) the significance and importance of complying with rules, practice directions and court orders, together with practical pointers to assist—see Practice Note: Case management—compliance As the TCC forms part of the Business and Property Courts, also consult Practice Note: Business and Property Courts, which provides guidance on the procedure to be followed when issuing and managing claims in the Business...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note is archived and is no longer maintained. This Practice Note examines the effects on dispute resolution arising from temporary measures brought in due to coronavirus (COVID-19), and related procedures too. It should be read alongside Practice Note: Coronavirus (COVID-19) implications for dispute resolution [Archived], and considered in parallel. It is intended to help dispute resolution practitioners grasp the rapid developments to civil court processes and procedures during this period, and how those shifts and the pandemic could affect their practice and particular matters in practice and day-to-day work. It includes civil court-specific guidance issued in response to the coronavirus outbreak, all of which is readily available for quick and consistent access via the ‘jump-links’ in the expandable contents table on the left-hand side of this Practice Note. As most court and tribunal buildings have reopened in accordance with public health guidance, practitioners should use the Gov.uk ‘Find a court or tribunal’ service for up-to-date status information and contact details for courts and tribunals. See Practice...

Claim No. [ enter claim number ]...

Claim No. [ enter claim number ]...

Enforcing an adjudicator’s decision We recognise that, after the Adjudicator issued their decision (the Decision), [ insert name of the responding party ] has declined to pay the sums the Adjudicator directed be paid to you. You have asked us to set out what steps you may take against [ insert name of the responding party ] to compel compliance with the Decision. While adjudicators’ decisions are binding as a matter of law, they do not carry the same standing as court judgments, and therefore cannot be executed in the same manner. Consequently, to require [ insert name of the responding party ] to honour the Decision, you will need to apply to the court. A number of court procedures are available to secure enforcement of adjudicators’ decisions. The approach most often adopted-particularly in situations such as this, where the successful party seeks payment of a monetary award made by the adjudicator-is to commence a claim in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC). The TCC has created a dedicated,...