Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

Fenwick Elliott

Fenwick Elliott

Claire King analyses recent judicial trends in the contractual interpretation of construction contracts

The key to resolving disputes is all too often working out what a particular provision or provisions actually means. Parties may have wildly different views on what something means even after spending hours negotiating the fine print and signing on the dotted line.

Claire King considers the benefits and pitfalls of letters of intent

The use of letters of intent can be fraught with difficulty. In this article I review the key case law on letters of intent of the past few years and seek to highlight some of the lessons that can be learned from them.

Michelle Knight reports on the rejection of an offer to mediate

Parties to civil litigation should take note of a recent decision in the TCC which considered whether the successful defendant had unreasonably refused to mediate and the cost consequences that followed.

Jeremy Glover reviews a recent decision of the TCC

Wain v Gloucestershire County Council [2014] arose out of the first Case Management Conference (CMC) and costs management hearing. The fourth defendant was one day late in filing her costs budget, so that instead of having been served seven clear days before the hearing, it was in fact served six clear days before the hearing. The claimant took the point that the fourth defendant was late in serving her costs budget. If that was right then the potential consequence as set out in CPR rule 3.14 was that the fourth defendant would be treated as having filed a budget comprising only the applicable court fees.

Lisa Kingston reports on the CIOB Complex Projects Contract 2013

In April 2013, after two years of drafting and consultations, the Chartered Institute of Building launched the CIOB Complex Projects Contract 2013 (CPC 2013). It is said to be the first contract that is specifically aimed at the good management of major national and international construction projects with a view to projects being delivered to specification, on budget and on time.

Jeremy Glover reviews recent case law on interim injunctions

In the case of AB v CD [2014], the Court of Appeal had to consider a point of principle about the proper approach to the granting of interim injunctions. More specifically, the courts had to consider the impact of limitation of liability clauses when a party seeks an interim injunction. When deciding on whether to grant an injunction, the well-known principles set out by Lord Diplock in the case of American Cyanamid Co (No 1) v Ethicon Ltd [1975] will be applied. These include whether there is a serious question to be tried and whether damages would be an adequate remedy.

Jeremy Glover outlines the Corelogic case

The case of Corelogic v Bristol City Council [2013], where Corelogic sought to amend its claim arising out of an alleged breach of the procurement regulations, provides a useful reminder about the 30-day limitation period that applies. Claims must be issued and served in this period that runs from the date when a claimant first knew or ought to have known that grounds for starting proceedings had arisen. A party cannot seek to get round this by adding ‘new claims’ which, at the time of the amendment, are barred by limitation.

Jeremy Glover reports on Henry v Mirror Group Newspapers

With the reforms to the way costs in civil litigation are managed being introduced on 1 April 2013, everyone is looking for pointers as to how the courts will interpret the new rules.

Jeremy Glover examines the use of expert evidence in procurement disputes

The case of BY Development Ltd v Covent Garden Market Authority [2012], heard before Coulson J raised important issues about the extent to which, if at all, expert evidence can be admissible or relevant in a procurement dispute under the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (as amended).