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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
Tullow Ghana Ltd v Vallourec Oil and Gas France S. A. S [2025] EWHC 3059 ( Comm) What was the background? This Commercial Court case centres on a protracted dispute about purportedly defective 7‑inch VAM TOP tubing provided for water‑injection wells in the Jubilee Oil Field, offshore Ghana. Tullow Ghana, which operates the field, sued the manufacturer, Vallourec Oil and Gas, for breach of contract and breach of implied terms under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 ( SGA 1979)—including that the tubing was of satisfactory quality, fit for purpose, free from minor defects, and durable—seeking damages of US$257,484,257. Vallourec denied fault, contending that any leakage was caused by excessive operational stresses rather than manufacturing defects. It further maintained that: its General Conditions of Export Sale ( GCs) were incorporated into the parties’ contract; and clause 8 of the GCs curtailed its liability to...
What are the practical implications of this case? Waiver pervades commercial law. In its typical guise, concerning contractual termination, it governs when a party is taken to have chosen to affirm or bring the contract to an end, thereby underpinning transactional certainty. Yet, if the party alleging waiver must establish the counterparty’s awareness of the particular contractual entitlement, that task is onerous. Proving what someone knew is intrinsically problematic, and the challenge is compounded where the relevant material is, as is frequently so, potentially privileged. Even so, the Court of Appeal concluded it was compelled to decide that knowledge of the right is a prerequisite, including where the right stems from express, executed terms. No carve-out exists by which the contents of express clauses are treated as known simply because they were agreed. The most acute practical issues arise in long, complex...
In this issue: Building safety Environmental issues Procurement in construction Termination Infrastructure projects Construction industry news Arbitration Litigation Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building safety Building Safety Regulator ( Establishment of New Body and Transfer of Functions etc) Regulations 2026 SI 2026/ Draft: These draft Regulations are laid to establish a new organisation, the Building Safety Regulator, and to appoint that body to replace the Health and Safety Executive as the building safety regulator for the purposes of the Building Safety Act 2022 ( BSA 2022) accordingly. They are scheduled to come into force on 27 January 2026 as drafted. See: LNB News 14/11/2025 5. Construction Products ( Amendment) Regulations 2025 SI 2025/1172: These Regulations amend both a UK statutory instrument and an item of assimilated direct legislation concerning construction. They make changes to Regulation ( EU) 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011, which sets...
In this issue: Contract law Building safety Infrastructure projects Energy projects Environmental issues Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Contract law Supreme Court confirms the ‘ Mackay v Dick’ notion is not part of English law; wrongful prevention of a condition’s fulfilment yields damages only, not a debt ( King Crude Carriers SA and others v Ridgebury November LLC and others) The Supreme Court in King Crude Carriers SA v Ridgebury November LLC [2025] UKSC 39 unanimously decided that English law does not recognise the so‑called ‘ Mackay v Dick principle’, by which a party that improperly stops a contractual condition being met is treated as though the condition were satisfied. The Court held that the sellers’ claims to deposits could not succeed as debts; their exclusive remedy lay in damages for breach of contract. The judgment underlines that English contract law should turn on...
In this issue: Building safety Payment under construction contracts Standard-form construction contracts Arbitration Construction industry news Litigation Lex Talk®Construction: the Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Construction trackers Building safety The Court of Appeal in Wilson v HB ( SWA) Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1360 rejected an appeal on fire safety defect claims, affirming the TCC’s firm stance on striking out unparticularised and speculative heads of loss. The ruling underscores the need for rigorous pleading in construction defect disputes. It confirms no substantive distinction between damages in contract and those available under the Defective Premises Act 1972, and stresses that loss must be clearly particularised in statements of case. Parties should concentrate on recognised heads of loss such as cost of remedial works, diminution in value or any residual diminution, and provable...
Gordon Winter Company Ltd v NH International ( Caribbean) Ltd ( Trinidad and Tobago) [2025] UKPC 52 What was the background? This case involved difficulties with piling. NH International ( Caribbean) Ltd (‘ NH’) acted as main contractor; Gordon Winter Company Ltd (‘ GW’) was its sub-contractor. Unforeseen ground conditions made the piling substantially harder than expected, necessitating departures from the original specification and adjustments to the method adopted. Although GW received some payments, nothing was paid after April 2006. Thereafter, GW stopped work and vacated the site in early June 2006, after which NH appointed a replacement contractor to finish the piles. In December 2006, GW issued proceedings to recover the value of the varied piling on a quantum meruit, advanced on a non-contractual unjust enrichment basis, expressly asserting that no relevant contract subsisted between the parties. NH responded with a...
Wilson and another v HB ( SWA) Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1360 What was the background? The appellants, Mr and Mrs Wilson, were previous leaseholders of two flats in the Celestia development, Cardiff, a residential scheme completed in 2007 with Redrow Homes ( South Wales) Ltd acting as the developer. The respondent, HB ( SWA) Ltd, has taken over Redrow’s rights and liabilities. The Wilsons issued proceedings against the defendant seeking damages after fire safety shortcomings and other defects were discovered at the building. The causes of action advanced were breach of contract (breach of implied terms in the leases) and/or breach of the duty owed under section 1 of the Defective Premises Act 1972 ( DPA 1972). Their Schedule of Loss set out nine heads of loss, seven of which the Technology and Construction Court ( TCC) struck out as too remote or purely...
Vision Construct Ltd v Gypcraft Drylining Contractors Ltd [2025] EWHC 2707 ( TCC) What was the background? Vision Construct Ltd ( VCL) and Gypcraft Drylining Contractors Ltd ( Gypcraft) entered into a sub‑contract on 12 November 2020, appointing Gypcraft as sub‑contractor under the JCT DBSub/ C 2016 form. A dispute emerged on Payment Cycle 23 in January/ February 2023. In adjudication, Gypcraft prevailed, with the Adjudicator deciding VCL was liable to pay £216,947.75 plus interest because Gypcraft had lodged a valid interim payment application 23 and VCL failed to issue either a payment notice or a pay less notice as required. Consequently, interim application 23 became payable for the amount claimed pursuant to section 110B(4) of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 ( HGCRA 1996). Gypcraft’s interim application 23, dated 16 January 2023, sought £342,385.52. VCL’s response on 7 February 2023 was a...
In this issue: Building safety Adjudication Standard construction contracts Arbitration Infrastructure projects Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building safety Building safety TCC’s decision to strike out several heads of claim in a defective premises claim upheld by the Court of Appeal ( Wilson v HB ( SWA)) The Court of Appeal ( Civil Division) in Wilson v HB ( SWA) Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 1360 rejected Mr and Mrs Wilson’s appeal against HHJ Keyser KC’s order striking out their Schedule of Loss. The Wilsons, two of 41 leaseholders at Cardiff’s Celestia Development, had sued the respondent developer for damages arising from fire safety issues and other building defects. The court held that seven heads of loss were properly removed because they were unpleaded, at odds with the Re‑ Re‑ Re‑...
MSA Global LLC ( Oman) And Engineering Projects ( India) Ltd [2025] SGHC 199 What are the practical implications of this case? For those practising in commercial arbitration, this decision confirms that the court at the juridical seat is paramount, in that it alone undertakes particular supervisory roles. Yet this does not stop a party from pursuing relief in another, non-seat court. Simultaneous litigation in different courts, with an arbitration running in parallel, adds further complexity to the conflict, as the two forums might deliver inconsistent outcomes on the identical point. If a court outside the seat is convinced to grant anti-arbitration injunctions or other measures, the client may face exposure to contempt risks. For advisers drafting arbitration clauses, the ruling underlines the significance of the selection of seat and the law governing the arbitration agreement. Naming an exclusive court in an...
In this issue Building safety Adjudication Standard form contracts Construction disputes Construction procurement Construction sector news Daily and weekly news alerts Construction trackers Building safety Defects, damages, and the Defective Premises Act ( Mallas v Persimmon Homes) The Technology and Construction Court in Mallas v Persimmon Homes Ltd [2025] EWHC 2581 ( TCC) granted compensation to the claimant for deficiencies affecting a residential property. The court addressed how to assess and quantify loss for substandard building works in contract and under the DPA 1972, and considered the ambit of the DPA 1972 requirement that dwellings be ‘fit for habitation’. See News Analysis: Defects, damages, and the Defective Premises Act ( Mallas v Persimmon Homes). BSR publishes building control application data showing Gateway 2 progress The BSR has released its October 2025 quarterly update on Gateway 2 building control approval submissions, outlining national and regional progress for new build and remediation activity. As at 1 October 2025, the BSR was...
Ioannis Mallas v Persimmon Homes Ltd and another [2025] EWHC 2581 ( TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment provides useful guidance on the legal and practical handling of residential defect claims, whether framed in contract or under the DPA 1972. Key points include: Fitness for human habitation: For DPA 1972 purposes, a home will only be unfit where defects present a real threat to health or safety, or give rise to significant inconvenience. Not every fault or shortcoming in design or construction will be actionable under the DPA 1972. Appropriate remedial solution: Demolishing a newly completed property is an exceptional measure, justified only if the building is dangerous or structurally compromised. In general, claimants can recover the reasonable cost of rectifying defects. Where two remedial schemes are equally effective, the less costly should ordinarily be...
The construction sector, including major international projects, is no exception. In this article, we consider: what AI signifies in the setting of international construction projects, with an emphasis on Generative AI; how it operates, how it diverges from traditional AI, and why it is set to transform the industry how AI is already being applied across the construction lifecycle, including design optimisation, quality control, project scheduling, health and safety monitoring, and robotics the kinds of legal disputes that may emerge from adopting AI, such as intellectual property ownership, liability for errors, employment law challenges, and data privacy breaches What is AI? AI, in the broadest sense, is not new. It has existed in various forms for years—for example, predictive text on smartphones and email spam filters both run on AI. Most of the current focus, however, concerns a particular type known as ‘ Generative AI’. In 2022,...
In this edition: Building safety Planning Construction sector news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building safety TCC backs developer’s remediation plan for flawed foundations and declines a total rebuild ( Mallas v Persimmon Homes Ltd) In Mallas v Persimmon Homes Ltd [2025] EWHC 2581 ( TCC), the Technology and Construction Court determined a homeowner’s claim seeking damages for the costs of rectifying, and for loss arising from, assorted alleged defects in the property against the housebuilding defendant. The claimant asserted a breach of clause 1 of the Contract and of section 1(1) of the Defective Premises Act 1972 ( DPA 1972), alleging the home was erected on foundations inadequate for the prevailing ground conditions. The central question concerned the proper remediation approach for the property in dispute here......
In this issue: Adjudication Building safety Infrastructure projects Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Adjudication Hexagon secures stay in relation to termination account adjudication decision pending Supreme Court judgment ( Providence v Hexagon) The Mayor’s & City of London Court ordered summary enforcement of an adjudication concerning a termination account in Providence’s favour, but stayed that order pending the Supreme Court’s imminent ruling on the validity of the termination in Providence Building Services Limited ( Respondent) v Hexagon Housing Association Ltd ( Appellant) UKSC/2024/0130. Applying the Wimbledon v Vago principles, the court concluded that, due to the interaction between the adjudication framework and Providence’s financial difficulties, it would be inexpedient to allow enforcement until the outcome of the Supreme Court hearing is known......
What are the practical implications of this case? The most recent ruling in the Providence v Hexagon dispute confirms that the courts can stay enforcement of adjudication awards when the cashflow advantage is outweighed by the danger of an employer paying monies it cannot later reclaim if the contractor becomes insolvent. Where an adjudicator finds for the contractor, yet the contractor faces insolvency risk and connected court proceedings are still on foot, the court may grant a stay on enforcement of the adjudicator’s decision, particularly where the outcome of those linked proceedings will determine whether the employer could ultimately recover sums that would otherwise have been paid. Contractors experiencing financial difficulty should therefore consider carefully whether to commence further proceedings until the first matter has been finally resolved. What was the...
In this issue: Building safety Adjudication Planning Infrastructure projects Construction industry news Lex Talk®Construction: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts Construction trackers Building safety MHCLG names interim Chief Construction Adviser for building safety and regulatory reform MHCLG has selected Thouria Istephan as interim Chief Construction Adviser on a 12‑month appointment, made through a direct ministerial route consistent with Cabinet Office guidance. In post, she will deliver independent expert counsel to ministers and the wider government on building safety and the programme of regulatory reform. This move implements the government’s response to Phase 2 recommendations from the Grenfell Tower Inquiry and is intended to steer reform and regulatory design while a permanent role is created next year. See: LNB News 01/10/2025 44. MHCLG issues second progress update on Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 recommendations The department has released its second quarterly update tracking delivery of the Phase 2...
Construction Muzzy Ltd v Davis Construction ( South East Ltd) [2025] EWHC 2258 ( TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? This judgment refines the boundaries of well‑established principles relating to jurisdictional objections and natural justice challenges to adjudicators’ decisions, and it draws attention to a number of practical pointers for those involved in adjudication, emphasising several day‑to‑day practice points that merit careful consideration. Key takeaways include: ‘same dispute’ arguments: the restriction on referring the same (or materially the same) dispute to multiple adjudications should be applied with common sense in practice, and is unlikely to capture comparable disputes arising under distinct contracts or within different contractual frameworks unsolicited submissions: although an adjudicator is not invariably obliged to consider uninvited material provided by a party, it may nevertheless be entitled to take such material into account without offending the rules of...
In this issue: Building Safety Arbitration Infrastructure projects Standard Form Contracts Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Latest Q& A Building Safety The Building Safety ( Wales) Bill On 7 July 2025, Housing Minister Jayne Bryant laid the Building Safety ( Wales) Bill before the Senedd. The legislation addresses the safety regime for the occupation and ongoing management of multi‑occupied residential buildings in Wales. In this piece, Rebecca Rees, partner at Hugh James, outlines the Bill’s key provisions. See News Analysis: The Building Safety ( Wales) Bill... HSE updates guidance on registered building inspectors HSE has refreshed its guidance for registered building inspectors, expanding details on building categories and inspector classes, including the scope of permissible work. See: LNB News 19/09/2025...
Background In the wake of the 2017 Grenfell Tower tragedy, Dame Judith Hackitt’s ‘ Independent Review of Building Regulations and Fire Safety’ (the Hackitt Report), commissioned by the government in response to this event, highlighted major shortcomings in fire safety arrangements for high-rise dwellings and in the construction materials employed. The Building Safety Act 2022 ( BSA 2022) was subsequently enacted. Numerous elements of BSA 2022 apply in Wales (although in some instances on a different timetable with separate regulations). That said, BSA 2022, Pt 4 ( Occupation and Management – Higher- Risk Buildings) does not apply, and the Welsh Government are pursuing a distinct, devolved framework for the regulation of multi-occupied residential buildings, informed by the Hackitt Report and the recommendations of the Welsh Government’s Building Safety Expert Group. This framework is now articulated in the Building Safety ( Wales) Bill (the Bill), which...
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
