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 Sole traders, informal partnerships and outdated partnership deeds are common.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
In this issue: JCT contracts Building Safety Arbitration Environmental issues Planning Infrastructure projects Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts Construction trackers JCT contracts JCT online launch event reveals details of new Target Cost Contract On 10 September 2025, the JCT ran a virtual launch to share deeper insight into its newly issued Target Cost Contract family, part of the JCT 2024 Edition. The JCT chair, Karen Kirkham, alongside John Riches, vice-chair of the JCT Drafting Sub- Committee, set out the contract’s origins—why it was developed, how it aligns with the 2024 suite, the benefits it aims to deliver, and the kinds of projects it is designed to back. They also described how the contract operates, detailing the payment approach, and provided a summary of the accompanying Target Cost Sub- Contract. Riches observed that the...
In this issue: Building safety Collateral Warranties Industry News Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers New Q& As Building safety Court upholds SSLUHC’s cladding remediation decisions against Grenfell contractor ( R (on the application of Rydon Group Holdings Ltd) v SSLUHC) In R (on the application of Rydon Group Holdings Ltd) v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities [2025] EWHC 2182 ( Admin), the Administrative Court rejected a judicial review brought by Rydon Group Holdings Limited ( Rydon) against the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (the defendant). Rydon, parent of Rydon Maintenance Limited ( Rydon Maintenance), had that subsidiary act as principal contractor on the Grenfell Tower refurbishment prior to the 2017 tragedy. Rydon also participated as a core participant in the ensuing Grenfell Tower Inquiry, and the...
In this issue: Arbitration Building regulations Planning Regulations and controls Lex Talk®Construction: a Lexis®Nexis community Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Arbitration Server wars— The future of data centre arbitration As businesses hurry to deliver the essential infrastructure for artificial intelligence, data centre development is accelerating across the globe. White & Case’s Brody Greenwald (partner), Darryl Lew (partner), Kate Perumal (partner) and Efat Elsherif (associate) explore how this construction boom could spur a new wave of international arbitration. See News Analysis: Server wars— The future of data centre arbitration. Charting the use of AI in Arbitration—a closer look at the CIArb Guideline (2025) The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators ( CIArb) has issued guidance on the use of artificial intelligence in arbitration. Piotr Wilinski of Linklaters LLP assesses the implications for practitioners and the outlook for arbitration, with thanks to Guido Machado Peláez for his assistance in preparing this article. See News...
Scope and purpose of the CIArb Guideline The CIArb Guideline is presented as a non-binding soft law instrument and is explicitly intended to apply to international arbitration proceedings, whether conducted ad hoc or administered by institutions. It provides practical direction on the responsible deployment of AI Tools, aiming to safeguard procedural fairness, ensure equality between the parties, and help preserve the integrity of the overall process. Part I— Benefits, risks, and definitions Part I establishes the framework for appreciating how AI might influence arbitral practice and procedure. It first highlights potential advantages (1.1–1.10), among other things, including greater efficiency, reduced costs, improved consistency in legal research, and assistance with procedural and administrative tasks within the process. At the same time, it recognises risks linked to AI use (2.1–2), such as lack of transparency, bias, data security issues, and the prospect of...
Booming investment and energy incentives may lead to investor-state disputes Data centres have long underpinned cloud storage, streaming platforms and the broader digital economy, yet AI is now propelling extraordinary demand for larger and more capable facilities. The US hosts the greatest number of hyperscale data centres—‘hyperscalers’ used by major tech giants such as Microsoft, Google, Meta and Apple—for intensive compute and storage, and US demand is forecast to more than triple between 2024 and 2030, requiring upwards of US$500bn in capital. However, although the US sets the pace, most fresh deal-making for data centres is occurring beyond its borders as operators hunt for cheaper land and reliable, low-cost power. Leading development hotspots include Asia- Pacific nations like India, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, alongside rising markets across the Middle East, Africa and Latin America. In Africa, for instance, the Bharti group is building its first...
In this issue: Building Safety Adjudication Construction disputes Planning Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Building Safety Welsh Government publishes developer remediation contract and dispute resolution guidance The Welsh Government has released the terms of a developer remediation contract, together with guidance on remediation project requirements and on settling disputes tied to the contract. A number of major housebuilders, including Barratt Redrow, Taylor Wimpey and Bellway, have signed. The contract obliges developers to identify and rectify—or fund the rectification of—life‑critical fire safety defects in specified residential and mixed‑use buildings they helped to develop. The project guidance outlines what is expected of those leading remediation, stressing that residents’ needs should remain at the heart of every stage. On dispute resolution, the guidance sets out mediation procedures for resolving disagreements between developers and third parties under the...
What is the purpose of PRMA 2025? PRMA 2025 obtained Royal Assent on 21 July 2025 and, apart from PRMA 2025, s 11(1) and (3), took effect that same day. As enabling legislation, it empowers the Secretary of State to make regulations to manage a wide spectrum of product safety risks and associated matters. On 22 July 2025, the Office of Product Safety and Standards (‘ OPSS’) issued a companion Code of Conduct that explains how government will exercise the powers granted under PRMA 2025. Why has PRMA 2025 been introduced? For years the UK’s product safety regime was shaped strongly by EU legislation. In the wake of Brexit, there was an increasing need for a distinct UK framework capable of evolving independently. At the same time, new hazards have appeared that the previous laws were not designed to deal with, including unsafe goods sold via online...
Clegg Food Projects Ltd v Prestige Car Direct Properties Ltd [2025] EWHC 2173 ( TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? Clegg Food v Prestige Car confirms that, in payment disputes over overall or global valuations, adjudicators have wide latitude in their determinations, including making a 'fair and reasonable' valuation drawn from the material and submissions advanced by the parties. Losing parties should take a pragmatic stance when considering enforcement challenges—where the outcome falls within the spectrum advanced by the parties, minor irregularities or high-level reasoning will not unsettle the decision unless there is a material breach of natural justice. Highly detailed natural justice complaints, where both sides sought a global valuation, are very unlikely to succeed. What was the background? The claimant contractor ( Clegg Food) and the defendant employer ( Prestige Car) entered into a JCT Design and Build contract for a leisure and...
In this issue: Adjudication Contract law Arbitration Procurement Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Adjudication Adjudicator’s fees, payless notices, and the residential occupier’s exception ( RBH v James) In RHB Building Contractors Ltd v James and another [2025] EWHC 2005 ( TCC), the Technology and Construction Court examined a range of points stemming from an adjudicator’s award. RBH sought roughly £663k and prevailed in a ‘smash and grab’ adjudication. The employer defeated summary enforcement, advancing an arguable case that it was a residential occupier for the purposes of section 106 of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996—thought to be the first reported occasion on which this defence to summary judgment has succeeded. The employer had also brought a Part 8 claim and convinced the court that its ‘...
RBH Building Contractors Ltd v James and another [2025] EWHC 2005 ( TCC) What are the practical implications of this case? It is widely regarded as the first occasion on which a responding party has successfully invoked the residential occupier exception in s 106 of the HGCRA 1996 to stop summary enforcement of an adjudicator’s award. Because adjudication has proved an effective route to resolve disputes, and given the danger of satellite litigation, the exception has typically attracted judicial scepticism. The Honourable Mr Justice Coulson (as he then was) remarked in Westfields Construction Ltd v Lewis: ‘ Is it not time for HGCRA 1996, s 106, and the other exceptions to statutory adjudication, to be done away with, so that all parties to a construction contract can enjoy the benefits of...
Climate change Climate change and the energy transition will continue to shape cross‑border disputes through the rest of this year and beyond. In investor–state arbitration, the tension has emerged because governments find themselves caught between competing imperatives, notes Christina G Hioureas, global co‑chair of Foley Hoag LLP’s international litigation and arbitration department and chair of its United Nations practice group. On the one hand, states owe duties under international law on climate, including commitments in accords such as the Paris Agreement. On the other, investors are bringing claims over measures aimed at cutting greenhouse gas emissions, for example limiting conventional oil and gas developments and winding down coal‑fired generation. Illustratively, the UK was served this month with a claim constituting its first climate‑related investor‑state dispute and its debut before the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes. Reports indicate the case concerns the setting aside of a...
In this issue: Standard form contracts Building safety Arbitration Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers Standard form contracts A quick guide to the Employer’s power to instruct under the JCT Design & Build Contract Employers’ rights to issue instructions under the JCT suite are frequently assumed rather than scrutinised. This overview, authored by James Ladner, legal director, and Fiona Fingland, associate, at Pinsent Masons, examines the foundations and breadth of the Employer’s ability to instruct within the JCT Design and Build Contract, the constraints on that ability, including in relation to variations after practical completion, and the ramifications where parties fail to manage instructions in accordance with the contract’s terms. See News Analysis: A quick guide to the Employer’s power to instruct under the JCT Design & Build Contract. Building safety The Building Safety Levy ( England) Regulations—a quick guide On 10 July 2025, the government presented the draft...
On 10 July 2025, the government placed the draft Building Safety Levy ( England) Regulations (the Regulations) before parliament. Drawing on powers created by the Building Safety Act 2022 ( BSA 2022), the Regulations establish the ‘building safety levy’ (the BSL, or the levy). The BSL applies to certain new residential developments. The proceeds will assist with meeting the costs of remediating building safety defects throughout England as a whole. The Regulations set out in detail when liability to pay arises, who must pay and at what stage, together with the approach for calculating the charge due. This article outlines the context for the Regulations and summarises their principal features in brief. Background to the levy Bringing in the BSL is a component of the UK government’s response to the Grenfell Tower Fire. It reflects the government’s view that leaseholders of...
Star Hydro Power Ltd v National Transmission and Despatch Company Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 928 What are the practical implications of this case? Parties should remember that only the courts of the legal seat may entertain any attempt to set aside or challenge the award. In arbitrations seated in England, any challenge must be issued in the courts of England and Wales pursuant to sections 67–69 of the Arbitration Act 1996. Anti-suit injunctions remain an important mechanism to restrain collateral attacks on awards abroad, support the parties’ selection of an English seat, and minimise overlapping proceedings across multiple fora. This may influence the choice of seat at the contracting stage and be relevant when confronted with proceedings in a foreign court. What was the background? The parties entered a contract to construct and operate a power plant......
In this issue: JCT contracts Building safety Adjudication Construction industry news Daily and weekly news alerts New and updated content Construction trackers JCT contracts A quick guide to the Employer’s power to instruct under the JCT Design and Build Contract Within the JCT suite, the Employer’s right to instruct is routinely assumed, even overlooked by many. Yet, this topic can be more nuanced than it initially seems. In this piece, James Ladner, legal director, and Fiona Fingland, associate, at Pinsent Masons, explore the foundations and breadth of the Employer’s instruction power under the JCT Design and Build Contract, the curbs on that authority, and what follows when the parties do not handle instructions as the contract requires, in accordance with its stated terms and procedures fully. See News Analysis: A quick guide to the Employer’s power to instruct under the JCT...
A quick guide to the Employer’s power to instruct under the JCT Design & Build Contract The Employer’s authority to issue instructions is frequently assumed, and routinely treated as a given within the contract framework, rather than examined closely on each project. This note outlines the Employer’s entitlement to instruct and explains the constraints, including those relating to changes after practical completion. Citations are to the JCT Design and Build Contract (2016) ( JCT D& B Contract), arguably the most commonly used JCT form; in light of the 2024 suite, clause references for DB 2024 are also provided where they differ. Where does the power to instruct come from? Clauses 2.1.4 and 3.5 oblige Contractors to act on every valid Employer’s instruction ‘forthwith’, meaning as soon as is reasonably practicable and without delay. What is the scope of the Employer’s power to...
Building safety; statutory construction; retrospectivity; exercise of discretion by FTT; meaning of ‘just and equitable’ ( Triathlon Homes LLP v Stratford Village Development Partnership & Others) Triathlon Homes LLP v Stratford Village Development Partnership and other companies ( Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, intervening) [2025] EWCA Civ 846 What are the practical implications of this case? This is the first appellate ruling on RCOs and confirms the wide scope of matters the tribunal may weigh when using its discretion to make an order. There are several practical lessons for practitioners. In particular: first, the exposure to unknown and potential no‑fault‑based liabilities. It is now clear RCOs can be made for defects originating as long ago as 1992. A change in beneficial ownership of a developer, or of a company associated with a developer, will not absolve those companies from...
In this issue: Building safety Planning Litigation Arbitration Daily and weekly news alerts Construction trackers Building safety RIBA announces formation of Belfast Group to standardise fire safety guidance The Royal Institute of British Architects ( RIBA), with institutes in Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and the Republic of Ireland, has unveiled the Belfast Group, a forum to harmonise fire and life-safety guidance across the five nations. Established following the Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 2 report, it aims to ensure architects in all jurisdictions have equal access to relevant national regulations, standards and technical materials needed to design buildings meeting the highest fire and life protection standards. The Group will issue consistent guidance for construction professionals on fire safety requirements and procurement practices. See: LNB News 25/07/2025 51. BCIP calls for evidence on building control reform BCIP seeks evidence on England’s building...
Adriatic Land 5 Ltd v Long Leaseholders at Hippersley Point [2025] EWCA Civ 856 What are the practical implications of this case? Relevant service charge sums incurred by a landlord and already collected from leaseholders before the commencement of BSA 2022, Sch 8 remain unaffected. Conversely, where a landlord had not succeeded in recovering those categories of service charge costs from a leaseholder under a qualifying lease before the coming into force of BSA 2022, the landlord is now prevented from doing so by the new regime. In the same vein, any relevant service charges incurred after Sch 8 came into force are not recoverable. The effect is potentially far‑reaching, as other provisions within Sch 8 are phrased so as to apply retrospectively, including those addressing cladding remediation, and are therefore likely to have broader implications across similar claims. What was the...
Greater Glasgow Health Board v Multiplex [2025] CSOH 56 What are the practical implications of this case? This ruling prominently underscores how the PL( S) A 1973 operates to prevent an affected party from recovering damages for defective works. It also stresses that those affected must promptly pinpoint the earliest date on which loss arose from a relevant contractual breach, so that proceedings are commenced within the prescribed period, namely where: mere ignorance of the contractual breach by the affected party is insufficient only unequivocal proof of positive acts by the party responsible for the defects, which induced the affected party not to bring a claim, will prolong the prescribed period any interruption of the prescriptive period excludes any time after the affected party could, with reasonable diligence, have identified the defects What was the background? In 2009, the parties entered into an NEC3...
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
