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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 11-20 of 27

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


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


Excluding liability for consequential loss and loss of profits
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • May 15 2009

In construction and engineering projects, the financial consequences of a breach of contract may be considerable in the worst case an employer may suffer extensive losses, including loss of profits, loss of business and loss of revenue


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


Concurrent delay an update
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • July 29 2011

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


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


Ignore notice requirements at your peril
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • April 15 2009

Most construction and engineering contracts require the contractor to give notice to the employer of events or circumstances when they happen as the first step in the process of claiming an extension of time andor additional cost


Is the credit crunch an event of force majeure or frustration?
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • November 30 2009

We have received a number of enquiries in recent months about the extent to which contractors can argue that a construction contract should be renegotiated (or even terminated) to take into account the increased cost, or reduced availability, of finance for major projects as a result of the global financial crisis


Liquidated damages clauses unenforceable as penalties
  • Herbert Smith Freehills LLP
  • United Kingdom
  • February 24 2010

In our last newsletter we discussed the basic principles of liquidated damages clauses


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