Welcome to the latest edition of 'Building Blocks', Charles Russell's quarterly on-line update focused on the Construction and Engineering industries. The update is produced by Charles Russell's specialist Construction and Engineering Team. Building Blocks aims to profile legal developments and case law that may affect your business.

In this edition, we look at the various techniques and methods for resolving disputes in the industry. We also consider recent authorities dealing with global claims and time bar clauses and focus on the McGlinn Judgement and specifically the implications for architect's inspection obligations. We also present the first article in a series of articles focusing on basic construction law issues - in this edition we review collateral warranties and third party rights.

CONSTRUCTION DISPUTE RESOLUTION: WHERE ARE WE NOW?
The introduction and growth of adjudication, the apparent fall in favour of domestic arbitrations and a new and improved Technology & Construction Court has resulted in changes to the way disputes are resolved in the industry. For more information and a review of dispute resolution techniques and methods in the light of recent developments click here.

GLOBAL RECOVERY OR GLOBAL DISASTER?
"Global claims" sometimes referred to as "total cost" or "rolled-up" claims are a common phenomena in the construction and engineering industry, but have historically been rejected by the Courts. But post the decision in John Doyle Construction v Laing Management [1997] and two recent decisions of the court (one of which was heard by the Court of Appeal in December 2007) are they now acceptable in English Law? Click here for more information.

TIME BAR CLAUSES
When the NEC3 was published there was much debate as to whether the failure to comply with sub-clause 61.3 (requiring the contractor to submit claims within 8 weeks of becoming aware of an event) would result in a contractor being time barred from bringing a claim. The recent shipping law case of Waterfront Shipping Company Ltd v Trafigura AG [2007] is an example of where the courts have adopted a robust approach to condition precedent clauses. The case concerned a ship's charter and a claim resulting from delay to the vessel's loading and discharge. In presenting its claim the claimant failed to produce a specific signed document which was a requirement of the contract. The Court considered that a breach of this requirement which was expressed to be a condition precedent had the effect of time-barring the whole of the claim. Whilst the specific conditions in the NEC3 have not yet been considered by the Court, it is probable that this robust approach will be followed.

ARCHITECTS INSPECTION DUTIES
In the June 2007 edition of Building Blocks in our "Construction Law Update" feature we referred to the case of McGlinn v Waltham Contractors Ltd & Others [2007]. This case concerned the construction of a substantial private residence in Jersey. Upon its completion the claimant, Mr McGlinn considered that the house was so badly designed and built that he was entitled to demolish the property and claim the cost of re-building it (circa £3.6m) from the contractor and the professional team. Sensibly the court concluded that the correct measure of loss was not the cost of demolition and rebuild but instead the cost of remedying any individual defects. The rather weighty Judgement (running to 40 pages) contains some clear guidance concerning architects inspection duties. Click here for key extracts from the Judgement.

For more information on Charles Russell's Construction & Engineering Team click here or contact David Savage (Partner, Head of the Construction & Engineering Team) at david.savage@charlesrussell.co.uk or on 01483 252614. The Chambers UK Guide to Legal Profession 2008 described the Charles Russell Construction & Engineering Team as follows:

"Split between offices in Guildford and Cheltenham, this construction team has been growing at an admirable rate under the leadership of David Savage, with little sign of abatement: three new fee earners have joined in the past year, bringing the total to seven. The group offers a full range of contentious and non-contentious construction work. Clients choose the firm for its "development experience, local government knowledge, ability to get to the heart of a matter and keen prices"".

David Savage, Stephen Rockhill and Sarah Jane Hudson are all ranked as leading individuals by Chambers 2008.

Previous Editions:
September 2007 >>more>>
June 2007 >>more>>