US evangelical group takes legal action against UK venues – The Guardian

Posted October 27th, 2020 in contracts, freedom of expression, news, religious discrimination by sally

‘A conservative US evangelical organisation is taking legal action against UK entertainment venues that cancelled appearances by Franklin Graham, a preacher who has expressed homophobic and Islamophobic views, earlier this year.’

Full Story

The Guardian, 27th October 2020

Source: www.theguardian.com

Academy trust facing legal challenge over award of £2m software contract – Local Government Lawyer

Posted October 16th, 2020 in computer programs, contracts, local government, news, public procurement by sally

‘A large academy school trust faces litigation from a firm that lost out in the award of an IT contract.’

Full Story

Local Government Lawyer, 15th October 2020

Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk

Man denied £1.7m payout by Betfred takes fight to High Court – BBC News

Posted October 16th, 2020 in computer programs, consumer protection, contracts, gambling, interpretation, news by sally

‘A man who was refused a payout of £1.7m after his online betting company account was credited with the money is taking his case to the High Court.’

Full Story

BBC News, 16th October 2020

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

New Judgment: Enka Insaat Ve Sanayi A.S. v OOO Insurance Company Chubb [2020] UKSC 38 – UKSC Blog

‘The central issue on this appeal is how the governing law of an arbitration agreement is to be determined when the law applicable to the contract containing it differs from the law of the “seat” of the arbitration, the place chosen for the arbitration in the arbitration agreement.’

Full Story

UKSC Blog, 9th October 2020

Source: ukscblog.com

Successful adjudication enforcement in favour of an insolvent company – Practical Law: Construction Blog

‘Hot on the heels of the Supreme Court’s decision in Bresco Electrical Services Ltd v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd, in what may be the first summary judgment to enforce an adjudicator’s decision in favour of a party in administration, we have successfully represented the claimant in Styles and Wood Ltd (in administration) (S&W) v GE CIF Trustees Ltd.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 1st October 2020

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

How cohabiting couples should protect their finances – Family Law

‘Historically, cohabitation agreements, sometimes known as “no-Nups”, were frowned upon as they were seen to encourage sexual relations outside of marriage. Thankfully, times have moved on and that’s no longer the case. The general view is that such agreements are enforceable if they deal with cohabitees’ property and affairs, and provided they are entered into freely with full information. Often, disputes between cohabitees following separation relate to what was or wasn’t intended, for example, in relation to the property in which they live. Having a clear record of the cohabitees’ intentions in a cohabitation agreement can avoid expensive disputes about those issues.’

Full Story

Family Law, 30th September 2020

Source: www.familylaw.co.uk

Moral rights: why should developers care? – Practical Law: Construction Blog

Posted September 11th, 2020 in artistic works, construction industry, contracts, intellectual property, news by tracey

‘Question: What do the Oslo Picasso murals “The Seagull” and the “The Fishermen” and the Dutch De View Jaargetijden have in common? Answer: They both have been subject to recent high cost, high profile litigation that dragged on for years and which concerned moral rights.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 9th September 2020

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

When can contractual limitation of liability clause limit third party’s tort claim? – Practical Law: Construction Blog

Posted September 2nd, 2020 in construction industry, contracts, duty of care, negligence, news, third parties by tracey

‘This was the question the court was asked to answer in RSK Environmental Ltd v Hexagon Housing Association Ltd.’

Full Story

Practical Law: Construction Blog, 26th August 2020

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

Court avers the right to legal proceedings but you may still have to pay up front on existing judgments – Hardwicke Chambers

‘This case acts as a reminder of the hierarchy to seeking a remedy in construction contracts. The right to legal proceedings in construction contracts is more fundamental than the payment provisions. The payment provisions are superior to the adjudication provisions. However, a party will still have to honour judgment debts in related proceedings.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 5th August 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Revisiting Force Majeure – St Ives Chambers

Posted August 14th, 2020 in chambers articles, contracts, coronavirus, news by sally

‘Firstly, it should be made clear that force majeure is a clause which allows a party or parties to an agreement to avoid performing it in some way. However, that is dependent on certain events as specified within the agreement occurring.’

Full Story

St Ives Chambers, 3rd August 2020

Source: www.stiveschambers.co.uk

Standing to bring a public procurement challenge—key considerations – Henderson Chambers

Posted August 14th, 2020 in chambers articles, contracts, local government, news, public procurement by sally

‘In a preliminary issue trial, the court considered the provisions of the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015) relating to standing to bring a claim. The claimant’s case was that the council had unlawfully amended and extended an existing contract instead of conducting a full public procurement exercise and that, had such an exercise been run, it would have assembled a consortium to bid for the contract and might have won it. In a lengthy judgment, His Honour Judge Russen QC hammered home the fact that a potential challenger has to establish on the balance of probabilities that it has a ‘material interest’ in the procurement in order to bring a claim under PCR 2015. It is not sufficient, in order to meet the requirements of PCR 2015, reg 91, for a claimant to say that it has established only a more than fanciful case that it has, through noncompliance with the regulations, lost a more than fanciful opportunity. Community R4C Ltd v Gloucestershire County Council [2020] EWHC 1803 (TCC).’

Full Story

Henderson Chambers, 5th August 2020

Source: www.hendersonchambers.co.uk

No duty to exercise option reasonably or in good faith in engine maintenance agreement (Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd v Lufthansa Technik AG) – 3PB

Posted July 30th, 2020 in airlines, contracts, interpretation, news by sally

‘The High Court found that there was no duty of good faith or duty to act reasonably in respect of an option to withdraw engines from a maintenance agreement. The judgment provides a helpful discussion of the case law concerning the principles of contractual interpretation and implied terms (including on the basis of the Braganza v BP Shipping Ltd and Socimer International Bank v Standard Bank London line of cases and relational contracts). The judgment also serves as a reminder to practitioners that evidence of statements made in precontractual negotiations, including mutual understanding (subject to limited exceptions) are generally inadmissible to assist with the interpretation of a concluded contract. Written by Rebecca Farrell, counsel, at 3 Paper Buildings.’

Full Story

3PB, July 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Dealing with Competing Jurisdiction Clauses: What is your Centre of Gravity? – 3PB

Posted July 30th, 2020 in contracts, interpretation, jurisdiction, news by sally

‘Complex commercial arrangements can generate difficulties for the parties where their obligations are set out in a multitude of related contracts or a single contract containing inconsistent dispute resolution clauses. It is not uncommon for parties to complex commercial contracts to find themselves arguing over the interpretation of inconsistent jurisdiction clauses which are either found in a single contract, or different but related contracts forming part of the same arrangements. Disagreements over the interpretation of jurisdiction clauses can arise in large-scale energy and infrastructure projects, and other types of arrangements where transactions usually take place under a master agreement. This note will explore the most common scenarios in which courts are often asked to interpret inconsistent dispute resolution clauses, with particular focus on the ‘centre of gravity’ approach adopted by courts.’

Full Story

3PB, 27th July 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk

Enforcing an adjudicator’s decision where no order for payment – Practical Law Construction Blog

‘Much has been written on the Supreme Court case of Bresco v Lonsdale and it has most recently been relied on by a party in the adjudication enforcement case of WRW Construction Ltd v Datblygau Davies Developments Ltd. However, as will be discussed in this blog, it was of limited assistance.’

Full Story

Practical Law Construction Blog, 28th July 2020

Source: constructionblog.practicallaw.com

Damaged by COVID-19 – What losses will be recoverable? – Hardwicke Chambers

Posted July 10th, 2020 in chambers articles, contracts, coronavirus, damages, news by sally

‘The normal rule for breach of contract is that losses are assessed as at the date of breach (The Golden Victory [2007] 2 AC 353.) However, this has never been an immutable rule, and the law in this area was significantly recast in the case of W Nagel (A Firm) v Pluczenik Diamond Company [2018] EWCA Civ 2640.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 29th June 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

‘Breathing space’: the impact of a more consensual approach – 3 Hare Court

‘On 27 April 2020 the British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL) published Breathing Space – a Concept Note on the effect of the pandemic on commercial contracts. The central thesis is that to mitigate the damaging effects of COVID-19 on the global economy, private law should encourage compromise and mediation rather than a zero-sum rush to terminate contracts and then to litigation and arbitration.

Full Story

3 Hare Court, 29th June 2020

Source: www.3harecourt.com

Insolvent Companies and Adjudication: Bresco Services Limited v Michael J Lonsdale [2020] UKSC 25 – Hardwicke Chambers

‘Adjudication is a quick and comparatively cheap method of dispute resolution and for those reasons is attractive to insolvent companies seeking to recover debts. However, a respondent was likely to be able to restrain the insolvent company from referring the matter to adjudication on the basis that it would be futile to do so, since any positive decision was unlikely to be enforced as a result of the very fact of the company’s insolvency. Therefore, any award lacked practical utility. Following the decision of the Supreme Court in Bresco v Lonsdale, that is no longer the case.’

Full Story

Hardwicke Chambers, 17th June 2020

Source: hardwicke.co.uk

Good Faith – a springboard to “Responsible Contractual Behaviour”? – Tanfield Chambers

Posted June 25th, 2020 in contracts, enforcement, news by sally

‘On 7 May 2020, the Cabinet Office issued guidance urging “responsible and fair performance and enforcement of contracts” during the Coronavirus pandemic. This guidance, which does not have legislative force, has caused some head-scratching amongst lawyers. Judges have traditionally been reluctant to muddy the waters of contract law (often murky enough as it is) with vague and subjective notions such as responsibility and fairness. The usual approach is – in simple terms – to hold the parties to the words they have used, imply only such other words as are necessary to make the contract work, and let the rest take care of itself. So what does the Cabinet Office guidance mean, and how, if at all, can the concept of “Responsible Contractual Behaviour” (“RCB”) be shoehorned into the existing law?’

Full Story

Tanfield Chambers, 24th June 2020

Source: www.tanfieldchambers.co.uk

The Supreme Court sanctions the use of adjudication in the insolvency context: Bresco Electrical Services Ltd v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd [2020] UKSC 25 – 3 Hare Court

‘The Supreme Court has given judgment in what is being hailed as a landmark case in the construction and insolvency spheres. The decision has not only eliminated any doubt that there is jurisdiction for an insolvent company to adjudicate against a respondent with a potential cross-claim, but it has also endorsed the use of adjudication as a helpful tool for liquidators.’

Full Story

3 Hare Court, 22nd June 2020

Source: www.3harecourt.com

Bresco Electrical Services Ltd (in liquidation) v Michael J Lonsdale (Electrical) Ltd [2020] USC 25, or ‘‘kicking the door wide open’’ – 3PB

‘Lord Justice Coulson’s judgment included the proposition that an insolvent Company could only adjudicate a dispute with a creditor in circumstances of mutual debts in “exceptional circumstances”. Subsequent caselaw has explored the extent of these “exceptional circumstances”.’

Full Story

3PB, 18th June 2020

Source: www.3pb.co.uk