We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 17

English Court of Appeal: The valuation of omitted works should not account for any breach of contract

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 29 2014

This is the second case between MT Hojgaard AS ("MTH") and E.ON concerning the construction of the Robin Rigg East offshore wind farm in the Solway

Fitness for purpose obligations take precedence over specification

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • June 30 2014

In the recent case in the English High Court of MT Hojgaard v E. ON1, it was held that a fitness for purpose obligation in a construction contract

How to terminate contracts effectively

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • December 19 2013

On 10th October 2013 the Technology & Construction Court, a division of the English High Court, decided the case of SABIC v PLL and SCL. The case

A significant new decision: Walter Lilly v Mackay July 2012

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 31 2012

In a major judgment published on 11 July 2012, Walter Lilly v. Mackay, Mr Justice Akenhead, the judge in charge of the Technology and Construction Court in London ("TCC") has given guidance on a number of important issues in construction law

Recovering wasted management costs

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • February 29 2012

Significant management costs can be incurred when one party is required to reorganize internal resources or divert staff from their usual activities in order to investigate, manage and mitigate the effects of the other party's breach of contract

Direct or indirect loss?

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • September 30 2011

Construction contracts often contain a provision excluding liability for indirect and consequential loss, but the distinction between direct loss and indirectconsequential loss can be a confusing one

Recovering losses incurred in settlement of a third party claim

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 30 2011

Under the usual principles of causation, in order to be successful in its claim before a court or tribunal, the claimant has to demonstrate that there has been a breach of contract and that that breach caused the claimant loss andor damage, and has to prove the quantification of that loss

Concurrent delay an update

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • July 29 2011

Delay is, of course, a common problem on construction projects worldwide

Letters of intent recent cases

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • November 30 2010

Letters of intent often form the foundation for construction works, but they also often form the basis for disputes

The City Inn decision a common sense approach to concurrent delays?

  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • August 30 2010

On 22 July, the Scottish Inner House (appeal court) in City Inn v Shepherd Construction handed down a significant judgment on an important issue relating to the assessment of concurrent delays in awarding extensions of time