Featured documents
R (Greyhound Board of Great Britain Ltd) v Welsh Ministers [2026] EWHC 670 (Admin) What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling reinforces the constitutional divide between the courts and the legislature. It explains that the scheme and framework of the Government of Wales Act 2006 (GWA 2006) embody that separation of powers, and that any judicial attempt to recognise and enforce a common law obligation on Welsh Ministers to consult prior to introducing legislation in the Senedd would trespass upon that boundary. This is not a departure from established principle; case law has already upheld comparable rules for lawmakers in Scotland and at Westminster. However, this is the first express confirmation of the position for Welsh lawmakers, and the first time this dimension of the GWA 2006 has been analysed in such depth. The court examined earlier
The solution arrived through the United Nations Compensation Commission (UNCC), a quasi‑judicial body handling mass claims, created under UN Security Council Resolution 687. By addressing environmental harm—most notably via its ‘F4’ claim class—the UNCC set a seminal benchmark shaping how international law and contemporary arbitral panels allocate financial responsibility for wartime ecological devastation. With present-day wars in areas such as Eastern Europe and the Middle East bringing dam breaches, strikes on chemical facilities, and the burning of farmland, the UNCC’s legacy endures as an essential reference point for states, global investors, and companies engaged in post‑conflict arbitration. The F4 claims: Quantifying the unquantifiable Prior to the 1990s, mechanisms in international law for war reparations overwhelmingly favoured property loss, foregone earnings, and bodily injury. The natural world was commonly treated as a mute, non-compensable victim of armed hostilities...
Understanding the farming business as a business Many farms still use long-standing structures that arose by habit, not strategy. Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common. While once effective, such setups can cause major issues around succession, tax planning and involving the next generation. A corporate team can take a fresh, business-led view of the farm, asking: Who owns the land and other critical assets? Who manages daily operations? Who carries the risk and who enjoys the return? What is the enduring plan for succession? From this review, the team can confirm whether the current setup is fit for purpose or if an alternative — for example an updated partnership agreement, a company, a limited liability partnership, or a blended model — would better meet the family’s aims. Tax efficiency through joined-up advice Tax sits at the centre of most
Most recent News
Real Estate: UK ( RE: UK) has issued its reply to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government ( MHCLG) consultation concerning classification of higher-risk building work......
In this issue: Building safety Arbitration Adjudication Planning for construction lawyers Environmental issues Procurement in construction Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building safety BCIP publishes report proposing an overhaul of England’s building control regime. The BCIP has issued a report urging sweeping reforms to England’s building control system, ending dutyholders’ ability to choose their regulator, consolidating statutory building control bodies, strengthening enforcement powers, introducing compulsory inspection standards, revising fees and funding, and deploying a national digital building control platform. Chaired by Dame Judith Hackitt and set up following the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, the BCIP concluded that the current public–private mix cannot reliably deliver independent, conflict‑free oversight of building work. The proposals are wide-ranging and aimed at systemic reform. See: LNB News 21/05/2026 28. MHCLG publishes Grenfell Tower...
The Scottish Government has issued an update on progress regarding implementation of Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 recommendations...
The UK Green Building Council ( UKGBC) has released a Whole Life Carbon ( WLC) Framework to assist the built environment sector in cutting and controlling carbon emissions throughout buildings’ life cycles and back projects aligned with net zero......
In this issue: Payment Building safety Scots law Consultants on construction projects Guarantees Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Payment Late payments— Tackling poor payment practices—government response Tim Wright, Partner in technology, outsourcing and commercial at Fladgate LLP, reviews the government’s reply to the late payment consultation ‘ Time to Pay Up’, issued on 24 March 2026, setting out the most far‑reaching measures to deal with overdue payments in more than a quarter of a century. Government figures suggest overdue invoices drain £11bn annually from the UK economy and push 38 firms out of business each day. The reform bundle would grant the Small Business Commissioner ( SBC) stronger authority to probe, determine and penalise firms; impose a hard ceiling of 60 days on payment terms; mandate statutory interest at 8% over the Bank of England base rate; fix a legal cut‑off for...
The government’s response The consultation ran from 31 July to 23 October 2025 and received over 850 responses. Secretary of State Peter Kyle characterised the outcome as delivering ‘the most ambitious legislation to tackle late payments in over 25 years’ and ‘the strongest legal framework on late payments in the G7’. Addressing late payment formed a pledge in the 2024 Labour Manifesto. At the heart of the package is a broadened remit for the SBC. The SBC—an independent public body created by the Enterprise Act 2016—currently helps small firms resolve payment disputes by offering guidance and issuing non-binding recommendations. It will receive three new categories of powers. First, investigatory powers: the SBC will be able to open inquiries on a wider array of evidence, including anonymous tips; require companies to supply information; and conduct compliance checks on payment reporting data, backed by financial...
What was the background? The reclaiming motion— Scotland’s term for an appeal—came before the Inner House of the Court of Session and related to Greater Glasgow Health Board’s ( GGHB) damages claim against Multiplex Construction Europe Ltd ( Multiplex) and others, said to arise from alleged defects in constructing the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow. The initial focus was the aluminium composite material cladding in the atrium, which GGHB contended had been installed contrary to contractual requirements. Multiplex denied liability and, in any event, maintained that any obligation to make reparation to GGHB had been extinguished by prescription under PL( S) A 1973, s 6(1). After a preliminary proof on prescription, the commercial judge concluded that the five-year prescriptive period began at practical completion in January 2015 and that GGHB’s action, raised in March 2022, had prescribed. He rejected GGHB’s reliance on PL( S) A...
Eiger Funding ( PCC) Ltd v Ridge and Partners LLP [2026] EWHC 609 ( TCC) (16 March 2026) What are the practical implications of the case? This ruling is a seminal, defining judgment that reshapes the scope and limits of monitoring surveyor exposure along three closely connected strands. First, the character of the IMS obligation. The most significant takeaway is that a monitoring surveyor must exercise independent professional judgement, not act as a passive conduit. Ridge was held in breach for repeating the developer client’s cost numbers in a report to Eager as “agreed and robust” without verifying them. The baseline is now fixed: objective benchmarking against an industry yardstick, such as BCIS, is compulsory. If a developer’s figures sit in the bottom quartile of market pricing, the surveyor must give a clear warning to the lender about the material risk of cost overrun. An IMS that...
Crest Nicholson Regeneration Ltd and others v Ardmore Construction Ltd (in Administration) and others [2026] EWHC 789 ( TCC) What was the background? The claimants ( Crest), comprising developers and leaseholders, issued an application in the Technology and Construction Court before Constable J for building liability orders ( BLOs) under sections 130–131 of the Building Safety Act 2022 ( BSA 2022) against companies ‘associated’ with Ardmore Construction Ltd ( ACL), the design and build contractor on a residential development. Prior to the hearing, ACL entered administration. Crest asserted that ACL was liable for fire safety defects under section 1 of the Defective Premises Act 1972 ( DPA 1972) and sought to extend that liability to its associated companies. The application advanced two strands of relief. First, an ‘anticipatory’ BLO rendering the associated companies jointly and severally liable for any liability later...
In this issue: Building safety Assignment Payment Planning in construction Product safety Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building safety BSR introduces external remediation improvement plan The BSR has unveiled an external remediation improvement plan to speed up higher-risk building ( HRB) safety works across England, improving the pace of essential remediation. The plan introduces several measures, including: (1) a new external remediation multidisciplinary team ( MDT), expanding on BSR’s Innovation Unit to streamline communication and processing through account managers and a single contact; (2) a recruitment drive to grow regulatory lead capacity, cutting caseloads from about 25 to roughly 10, to benefit both applicants and BSR processes; (3) the application of ‘approval with requirements’ to allow projects to commence safely while resolving technical issues and (4) updated external remediation guidance to help...
Crestline Direct Finance LP v Insurance Company Euroins AD [2026] EWHC 423 ( TCC) What are the practical implications of the case? This decision highlights two pragmatic takeaways for lawyers and construction practitioners. First, it underscores the need to craft, from day one, a coherent assignment plan and to implement and record it correctly. Employers should see that building contracts and security instruments (including performance bonds) confer adequate rights of assignment, state any cap on the number of assignments, and name likely assignees (such as funders or prospective buyers/tenants). Each assignment must be executed in the agreed form and notified to all relevant stakeholders (for instance, the contractor or the surety). Adhering to these steps will make it simpler for assignees to call on bonds and will avert the sort of ‘fatal’ uncertainty encountered in this case. Secondly, the court...
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government ( MHCLG) has opened a consultation to fine-tune how building works are classified under England’s higher-risk building ( HRB) regime. Rather than altering the definition of HRBs, it examines whether the way works to those buildings are categorised is correctly calibrated. The existing framework—created in response to the Grenfell Tower tragedy and given effect through the Building Safety Act 2022—sets a hard boundary: once a building meets the HRB definition, a broad spectrum of works activates the full building control regime under the oversight of the Building Safety Regulator ( BSR). That stance echoes earlier interventions, such as the 2018 ban on combustible materials in HRBs, which likewise depended on clear, rule-based thresholds (notably height and use) that favour safety over flexibility. For commentary on HRB definitions and criteria, see Practice Note: Building Safety Act...
Laing O’ Rourke Delivery Ltd v Shepperton Studios Ltd [2026] EWHC 612 ( TCC) What was the background? The claimant, Laing O’ Rourke Delivery Ltd ( LOR), moved to uphold an adjudicator’s decision against the defendant, Shepperton Studios Ltd ( SSL), under a building contract dated 16 November 2021. The dispute centred on interim payment cycle 45—specifically, whether SSL’s payment notice and pay less notice were valid under the contractual payment machinery. Though not stated in the judgment, the payment terms appeared to mirror those in a Joint Contracts Tribunal ( JCT) 2016 form of main contract. The adjudicator concluded that both of SSL’s notices were ineffective because they failed to set out the basis of calculation, and awarded LOR the amount sought in its application for payment. The proceedings came before Simon Lofthouse KC, sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court in the TCC, on...
In this issue: Building safety Procurement in construction Arbitration Planning in construction Infrastructure projects Tax for construction lawyers Construction industry news Lex Talk®Construction: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building safety Building liability orders—‘anticipatory’ orders and adjudication decisions ( Crest Nicholson v Ardmore) In Crest Nicholson Regeneration Limited v Ardmore Construction Limited [2026] EWHC 789 ( TCC), the TCC handed down what seems to be only the second judgment considering an applicant’s right to a building liability order ( BLO) under section 130 of the Building Safety Act 2022. The applications arose from a dispute concerning fire safety and other defects at a residential scheme in Portsmouth. The applicants asked the court to grant: (i) ‘anticipatory’ BLOs against multiple defendants, making them jointly and severally liable for any...
In this issue: Building safety Payment Environmental issues Planning Procurement in construction Arbitration Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building safety Scottish Government publishes cladding remediation guidance and programme update The Scottish Local Government and Housing Directorate, together with the Cladding Remediation Directorate, has issued fresh guidance on checking cladding remediation building warrant applications. This material underpins the rollout of the Building ( Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2022 ( SI 2022/136), which from 1 June 2022 prohibit combustible cladding on buildings exceeding 11 metres. Under these provisions, products must meet European Classification A1 or A2-s1, d0 in line with BS EN 13501-1:2018 standards. Separately, the Cabinet Secretary for Housing, Mairi Mc Allan, has confirmed that Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey, Barratt Redrow and Springfield have executed the Developer...
In this issue Building safety Adjudication Litigation Arbitration Consultants on construction projects Planning in construction Tax for construction lawyers Energy in construction Infrastructure projects Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building safety The Scottish Government has confirmed that the Scottish Parliament has passed the Building Safety Levy ( Scotland) Bill, bringing in a levy on selected new residential developments to support cladding remediation. The levy will cover defined categories of new residential projects and, after its original start date was deferred, is now anticipated to come into force from April 2028. See: LNB News 18/03/2026 32. The Welsh Government has announced that the Senedd has approved the Building Safety ( Wales) Bill. The legislation sets up a new building safety regime for residents of...
What are the practical implications of this case? The ruling carries significant, practical consequences for litigators, insolvency practitioners and participants in construction adjudication. The court confirmed that appointing a provisional liquidator does not of itself vest a company’s assets, so insolvency does not operate as a judicial transfer of claims to the liquidator. In consequence, those relying on assigned claims can be confident the assignment remains valid even if the assignor later enters liquidation, cutting uncertainty over title to sue and discouraging satellite disputes about vesting and assignment mechanics. The decision also reinforces that jurisdictional objections in adjudication must be stated plainly and with specificity. A party cannot shelter behind vague reservations whilst fully engaging in the process. This promotes disciplined dispute management: referring parties should advance precise jurisdictional points at the earliest moment or risk being held to the...
In this issue: Standard form construction contracts Building safety Expert Determination Litigation Arbitration Environmental issues Planning in construction Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Standard form construction contracts The SBCC Minor Works 2024 edition—what’s changed? On 26 February 2026, the SBCC unveiled its refreshed 2024 Minor Works contracts, replacing the 2016 Editions, with revised versions of the principal traditional contracts and the design and build forms to arrive later in the year. Michael Conroy, Partner and Head of the Construction & Engineering Practice at Harper Macleod LLP, sets out the headline amendments for the SBCC 2024 standard form suite and their anticipated practical effect. See News Analysis: The SBCC Minor Works 2024 edition—what’s changed? Building safety BSR rejects remedial scheme leading to split trial ( Woodland Court v RCGM Ltd &...
Share your insights here What are the key changes introduced into the SBCC 2024 Contracts? The SBCC 2024 Contracts have been updated in line with the parallel Joint Contracts Tribunal ( JCT) standard forms used in England and Wales, amounting to ‘kilted versions’ of those JCT documents, with departures introduced to accommodate the distinct legal framework north and south of the border. Overall, the revisions are arranged around three central aims that mirror the approach taken for the corresponding JCT suite and clarify how Scottish practice aligns with, yet differs from, the position in England and Wales: capturing legislative developments since the 2016 editions; future proofing the forms; modernising and streamlining the drafting. Legislative changes For England and Wales, notable amendments to the JCT contracts respond to the Building Safety Act 2022, in particular Part 2A dealing with the regulation of higher-risk buildings. Where that statute has only a...
WH Holding Ltd v London Stadium LLP (formerly E20 Stadium Llp) [2026] EWCA Civ 153 What are the practical implications of the case? This decision sets out clear parameters for what amounts to a ‘manifest error’ in an expert determination. It also confirms that complaints about the application of a formula do not attract a distinct standard: ie the manifest error threshold applies whatever the character of the alleged mistake. The hurdle to overturn a determination for manifest error is high. A merely arguable misstep is not enough. The error must be ‘so obvious as to admit of no difference of opinion’. The Court of Appeal further emphasised scrutiny of the expert’s analytical starting point: ie was that plainly incorrect. Where the expert is granted a wide discretion under the determination mechanism, it is harder to impugn their conclusion than where the...
Popular documents
When evaluating a general damages claim, the practitioner ought initially to refer to the Judicial College Guidelines (JCG)...
This Practice Note This Practice Note reviews mechanisms used in settling litigation. A Tomlin order consists of a consent order paired with a schedule. It operates to stay proceedings on terms that have been agreed. The provisions contained in the schedule may remain confidential. This Practice Note describes the scope of confidentiality attaching to the schedule and sets out how it differs from a standard consent order. Sample wording for a Tomlin order is included, alongside links to precedents, as well as guidance on court approval. It also addresses varying, setting aside and enforcing a Tomlin order, including the considerations the court will take into account when handling applications for each. Further guidance is provided on interpreting and applying the relevant provisions of the CPR; however, some courts and divisions impose very specific requirements for both drafting and approval, and for approaching the schedule and confidentiality issues. Accordingly, you must consider the particular rules and court guide provisions in the forum where your claim is proceeding when drawing up the Tomlin order...
Date [ date ] Parties [ name of Landlord ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Landlord) [ name of Tenant ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Tenant) [ [ name of Guarantor ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Guarantor) ] [ [ name of Mortgagee ] [ of OR incorporated in England and Wales (company registration number [ number ]) with its registered office at ] [ address ] (Mortgagee) ] Definitions Within this Deed, the terms below shall be interpreted as follows: [ Annual Rent • the annual sum reserved under the Lease; ] [ Insurance Rent • the Tenant’s share of the Landlord’s costs of insuring the Property (as set out in the Lease); ] Lease • the lease of the Property dated [ date ], entered into between (1) [ the Landlord OR [ name ...
I, [ name ], of [ address ], solemnly and sincerely state that: [ Matters to be verified, set out in numbered paragraphs ] I make this solemn statement in good conscience, believing it to be true, and pursuant to the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1835. DECLARED at [ details ] this [ day ] day of [ month and year ] Before me ................................................................................ [ signature of the person before whom the declaration is made ] A [ commissioner for oaths OR [ solicitor OR [ insert other qualification ] ] authorised to administer oaths ]...
Discover more from LexisNexis
