Many construction and engineering disputes in the courts, especially those relating to smaller or less sophisticated projects, are issued outside of the Technology and Construction Court (known as the 'TCC’ for short) and never get transferred.

This is despite the judge in the case of Robinson v PE Jones saying:

"I should at this point mention that cases of this nature should be commenced in the Technology and Construction Court. If they are not so commenced, then the action should be transferred as soon as possible after issue to the Technology and Construction Court, so that the action can have the benefit of case management by a judge with specialist expertise in this field. I deplore the fact that this litigation ran on for 2 ½ years before it was transferred to the Technology and Construction Court and placed before a judge with appropriate expertise."

The ambit of the TCC is really rather wide and is set by rule 60 of the Civil Procedure Rules. As well as construction, building and engineering disputes, it is also the right place to determine disputes involving claims by and against construction consultants, local authority building matters, information technology, construction/engineering goods and materials, landlord and tenant repairing covenant disputes, through to even certain procurement, trespass, nuisance and environmental matters.

It has its own procedures and guide and the judges are specialists in the field with a broad range of relevant experience.

The TCC is more likely to provide appropriate and efficient directions to its target cases than the general court would and the judges are far more likely to understand the issues and what it will take to resolve them.

It is straightforward to commence matters in the TCC but also easy, especially thanks to the above case, to have appropriate cases transferred into it.