Category: Construction

Hallamshire Construction Plc v South Holland District Council: TCC 16 Jan 2004

CS Appeal on a question of law from an award of an arbitrator in a dispute arising out of a JCT form of contract. The appeal concerned these questions: whether an Architect’s Instruction issued under the contract had contractual effect; the meaning of the phrase ‘all costs in connection with this variation to be agreed by [the quantity surveyor]’; and as to whether this process of agreement involved the identification of an offer relating to the entirety of the works which had been accepted or whether agreement could be achieved by piecemeal agreement of bill items.
Held: The arbitrator correctly concluded that the AI in question had contractual effect and that the process of agreement it provided for was not of the kind involved when a new contract is being negotiated and finalised but was of the piecemeal kind required by the contractual procedures for ordering variations and pricing them.

Judges:

Thornton QC J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 8 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Construction

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.266696

Multiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another: TCC 7 Feb 2008

Judges:

Jackson J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 231 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd TCC 31-Aug-2005
A third party television company sought access to the particulars of claim and other pleadings.
Held: HH Judge Wilcox said: ‘There can be no legitimate distinction drawn between decisions made in interlocutory proceedings and those at final . .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd TCC 5-Jun-2006
. .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another CA 20-Dec-2006
. .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd (No. 2) TCC 31-Jan-2007
. .
See Also – Multiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd TCC 8-Feb-2007
Application for permission to appeal. Jackson J considered whether permission to appeal should have been requested at the hearing: ‘It seems to me that I have got to interpret the provisions of Rule 52.3 and the provisions of the Practice Direction . .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd (No. 2) TCC 6-Mar-2007
. .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd (No 3) TCC 12-Mar-2007
. .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd (No 3) TCC 12-Mar-2007
. .
See Also – Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd CA 27-Apr-2007
The court construed an agreement supplemental to a construction contract. . .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another CA 21-Dec-2007
. .
See Also – Multiplex Construction Ltd v Cleveland Bridge Ltd and Another CA 6-Feb-2008
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another TCC 19-Mar-2008
. .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another TCC 29-Sep-2008
. .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another (No 7) TCC 29-Sep-2008
Last stage of the Wembley stadium construction dispute. Jackson J, interpreting Carver said that it set out: ‘how the court ought to approach the matter in circumstances where: (a) one party has made an offer which was nearly but not quite . .
See Also – Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd CA 19-Feb-2010
. .
See Also – Cleveland Bridge Uk Ltd and Another v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd CA 31-Mar-2010
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.265937

Reinwood Ltd v L Brown and Sons Ltd: HL 20 Feb 2008

The employer received a notice of non-completion from his architect, and in turn served a notice on the contractor under section 111, and deducted damages for non-completion from the next payment. The contractor said this was not allowed because the architect had in the meantime granted an extension.
Held: The contract should be construed in the light of the statute to which it gave effect. The extension did not cancel the notce of non-completion. The contractor should still have referred the matter to arbitration.

Judges:

Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury

Citations:

[2008] UKHL 12

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 111

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Reinwood Ltd v L Brown and Sons Ltd CA 21-Jun-2007
. .
Cited – Melville Dundas Ltd and others v George Wimpey UK Ltd and others HL 25-Apr-2007
The appellant sought an interim payment for works of construction undertaken for the respondents under a JCT contract. The respondents contended that, having terminated the contract on their receivership, the contract and Act meant that the interim . .

Cited by:

See Also – Reinwood Ltd v L Brown and Sons Ltd CA 17-Oct-2008
The court was asked whether a contractor under a particular building contract was entitled to determine the contract and walk away, or whether such behaviour amounted to a repudiation entitling the main contractor to damages. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Contract

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.264638

Drake v Harbour: CA 31 Jan 2008

The plaintiff engaged the defendants to re-wire her house. She was away, and the defendants in sole charge of the house when it suffered a major fire originating in a room used by the defendants. The defendants appealed a finding of liability saying that, there having been a dispute as to the facts, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur could not be used to place a burden of proof on them.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘In the absence of any positive evidence of breach of duty, merely to show that a claimant’s loss was consistent with breach of duty by the defendant would not prove breach of duty if it would also be consistent with a credible non-negligent explanation. But where a claimant proves both that a defendant was negligent and that loss ensued which was of a kind likely to have resulted from such negligence, this will ordinarily be enough to enable a court to infer that it was probably so caused, even if the claimant is unable to prove positively the precise mechanism. That is not a principle of law nor does it involve an alteration in the burden of proof; rather, it is a matter of applying common sense. The court must consider any alternative theories of causation advanced by the defendant before reaching its conclusion about where the probability lies. If it concludes that the only alternative suggestions put forward by the defendant are on balance improbable, that is likely to fortify the court’s conclusion that it is legitimate to infer that the loss was caused by the proven negligence. ‘

Judges:

Toulson LJ VP, Waller, Longmore LJJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 25, [2008] NPC 11, 121 Con LR 18

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Lloyde v West Midlands Gas Board CA 1971
The court considered the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur and the burden of proof in establishing negligence: ‘I doubt whether it is right to describe res ipsa loquitur as a ‘doctrine’. I think that it is no more than an exotic, although convenient, . .
Cited – Roadrunner Properties Ltd v Dean and Another CA 21-Nov-2003
Where an application is made under the 1996 Act, as to the issue of causation of damage, a court can properly take a reasonably robust approach where the damage to the adjoining owner’s property is of the sort one would expect to result from the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Vaile v London Borough of Havering CA 11-Mar-2011
The claimant teacher sought damages after being assaulted at school by a child with special needs. The pupil had been identified as having an autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) but the claimant was not aware of that and had not been advised as to the . .
Cited – Wilson v Haden (T/A Clyne Farm Centre) QBD 15-Feb-2013
The claimant sought damages after being injured on an adventure sports weekend hosted by the defendant.
Held: The defendants had failed to follow their own safety procedures associated with this particular feature. The landing area cushioning . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Construction

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.264036

Discain Project Services Limited v Opecprime Developments Limited: TCC 11 Dec 2001

Judges:

Judge Richard Seymour Q.C.

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Technology 450

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Discain Project Services Ltd v Opecrime Development Ltd TCC 11-Apr-2001
. .
See Also – Discain Project Services Ltd v Opecrime Development Ltd TCC 1-Aug-2000
The applicant sought leave to defend the enforcement of an arbitration award.
Held: The adjudicator had accepted oral and written communications with one party, from which the other party was excluded. This was such a serious breach of the . .

Cited by:

See Also – Discain Project Services Ltd v Opecprime Developments Ltd (2) TCC 11-Dec-2001
This was a dispute between contractors. D had been engaged to install balconies on flats constructed by O. Targets were set, but there were difficulties in obtaining supplies. Continued negotiations confused the situation. Eventually the contract . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Arbitration

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.169860

James v Revenue and Customs: VDT 9 Nov 2007

VDT ZERO-RATING – Construction of building – Dwelling house – Self-build construction of house for own occupation – Defective plasterwork installed by contractor – Complete replacement plastering required – Whether supply of new plastering service after ‘Certificate of Completion’ a supply in the course of construction of a new dwelling – Yes – Whether that supply was for the reconstruction or alteration of an existing building – No – VAT Act Sch. 8 Group 5 It. 2 and Note (16) – Appeal allowed

Citations:

[2007] UKVAT V20426

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994

VAT, Construction

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.262553

Thurgood v Coyle: ChD 5 Jul 2007

A construction company had become insolvent and unable to complete a development. The architects denied that the liquidator had the right to include in the sale of the site any right to use the drawings it had prepared under the standard JCT contract.

Judges:

Lewison J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2696 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property, Construction

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.261895

Channel Island Ferries Ltd v Cenargo Navigation Ltd (The Rozel): QBD 5 Apr 1994

Arbitrator to award all costs even if award much less than original claim.
Phillips J said: ‘It is always necessary to exercise the greatest care before applying the reasoning in one case to a different factual situation, and this is particularly true in the field of damages. The majority of the Court in Ruxley Electronics did not hold that a plaintiff can recover in damages the cost of remedial measures which are unreasonable. They held that, in the circumstances of that case it was not unreasonable for the plaintiff to spend the substantial sum necessary to have what he had contracted for. The test of what was reasonable had to have regard to his personal preference, as expressed in the depth of water that he had contractually required. This reasoning can be applied to a requirement which is incorporated in a contract as an end in itself, reflecting a personal preference of the contracting party. It does not apply where the contractual requirement is not an end in itself, but is inserted into a commercial contract because it has financial implications. If, in such a case, the contractual requirement is not met, the costs of remedial measures will not normally be recoverable as damages if they are disproportionate to the financial consequences of the breach. If that is the case it will not be reasonable to incur those costs. The damages recoverable will be those necessary to compensate for the financial consequences of the breach.’

Judges:

Phillips J

Citations:

Times 05-Apr-1994, [1994] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 161

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ruxley Electronics and Construction Ltd v Forsyth CA 7-Jan-1994
In 1986, the defendant, wanted a swimming pool adjoining his house. He contracted with the plaintiffs. The contract price for the pool, with certain extras, was 17,797.40 pounds including VAT. The depth of the pool was to be 6 ft 6 in at the deep . .

Cited by:

Cited – Ruxley Electronics and Construction Ltd v Forsyth HL 29-Jun-1995
Damages on Construction not as Agreed
The appellant had contracted to build a swimming pool for the respondent, but, after agreeing to alter the specification to construct it to a certain depth, in fact built it to the original lesser depth, Damages had been awarded to the house owner . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Arbitration, Damages, Construction

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.78974

Glasgow School of Art v The Commissioners for Hm Revenue and Customs: UTTC 6 Jun 2019

VALUE ADDED TAX — construction of new building and partial demolition and reconstruction of existing building – one building or two – single supply or two separate supplies – whether supplies made for consideration constituting an economic activity – appeal refused

Citations:

[2019] UKUT 173 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, Construction

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.639523

R C Pillar and Son v The Camber: TCC 15 Mar 2007

The claimant sought to enforce an arbitration award for construction work it had carried out for the defendant. The defendant denied that there had been a contract under which an arbitration could properly have been commenced, and was without jurisdiction.

Judges:

Thornton QC J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1626 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Construction, Arbitration

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258367

Iggleden v Fairview New Homes (Shooters Hill) Ltd: TCC 1 Jun 2007

The claimants bought a newly built home from the defendants. Defects were alleged and admitted, but the defendants said the claimants had failed to mitigate their losses or accept offers to have work done. The claimants now sought leave to add shortly before the trial a claim for blight.
Held: The amendment could have been made before and should have been made before. Leave was refused.

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1364 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Payzu Limited v Saunders CA 1919
The innocent plaintiff buyers had been found to have failed to mitigate their damages because they had not accepted an offer from the defendant sellers (who were in breach of contract) to supply goods on cash terms, the contract having originally . .
Cited – George Fischer (Great Britain) Ltd v Multi Construction Ltd., Dexion Ltd. (third party) 1995
The plaintiff contracted with the defendant for the defendant to install equipment on the premises of one of the claimant’s subsidiaries. The equipment was to be used by the subsidiary. The equipment was defective and damage was suffered by the . .
Cited – Woods v Chaleff 1999
Whether an amendment should be allowed to pleadings shortly before the trial. . .
Cited – Morris v The Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association (Amendment of Claim) 2002
Whether party should be allowed to amend pleadings shortly before a trial. . .
Cited – Bowerbank v Amos (Formerly Staff) CA 31-Jul-2003
The parties had gone into business together. After a breakdown, they had now spent very considerable sums in litigation. At the trial, the judge allowed an amendment of the claim after the close of evidence. He considered that it related to matters . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Construction

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258379

Zurich Insurance Company v Gearcross Ltd: TCC 25 May 2007

The claimant insured new buildings under a scheme at the request of developers. It now sought re-imbursement of expenditure in remedying defects in a property constructed by the defendant.

Judges:

Peter Coulsn QC J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1318 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insurance, Construction

Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.258376

Melville Dundas Ltd and others v George Wimpey UK Ltd and others: HL 25 Apr 2007

The appellant sought an interim payment for works of construction undertaken for the respondents under a JCT contract. The respondents contended that, having terminated the contract on their receivership, the contract and Act meant that the interim payment was no longer payable.
Held: (Neuberger and Mance dissenting) The appeal was allowed. Lord Hoffmann: Parliament had not intended that a payment once due should cease to be so due because of the insoilvency of the contractor. Section 111(1) should be construed as not applying to a lawful ground for withholding payment of which it was in the nature of things not possible for notice to have been given within the statutory time frame.

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Mance, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury

Citations:

Times 08-May-2007, [2007] UKHL 18, [2007] 1 WLR 1136, [2007] 3 All ER 889

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 111

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Appeal from – Melville Dundas Ltd v Hotel Corporation of Edinburgh Ltd IHCS 7-Sep-2006
If a contractor became insolvent, Parliament ‘has provided quite clearly that . . the losses should be borne by the . . employers under the contract.’ . .
Cited – Bouygues (Uk) Ltd v Dahl-Jensen (Uk) Ltd (In Liquidation) CA 17-Aug-2000
When the decision of an adjudicator was challenged, the court should ask whether the adjudicator had either asked the right question but in the wrong way, or whether he had even answered the wrong question. The procedure was intended to provide a . .
See Also – The University Court of The University of Glasgow v Melville Dundas Limited E.M. Mackenzie and Co Limited L.C.H. Generators Limited OHCS 23-Apr-2004
. .
See Also – Melville Dundas Limited (In Receivership) and the Joint Receivers Thereof v George Wimpey UK Limited Norwich Union Insurance Limited OHCS 15-Dec-2005
. .
Cited – Highland Engineering Ltd v Thomson 1972
The liquidation of a company is treated as the equivalent as bankruptcy to prevent the hardship of a debtor who is also a creditor being forced to pay in full, when he will come in only as a creditor for a dividend for his debt as a result of . .
Cited – C and B Scene Concept Design Ltd v Isobars Ltd CA 31-Jan-2002
The claimant appealed a refusal of summary judgement, in a claim to enforce an arbitration award. Where an award was challenged, enforcement should still be allowed to continue unless the challenge went as to the jurisdiction of the reference. . .
Cited – Modern Engineering (Bristol) Ltd v Gilbert Ash (Northern) Ltd HL 1974
The court considered how to construe a clause in a contract which excluded a remedy provided by law. Lord Diplock said: ‘It is, of course, open to parties to a contract . . to exclude by express agreement a remedy for its breach which would . .

Cited by:

Cited – Reinwood Ltd v L Brown and Sons Ltd HL 20-Feb-2008
The employer received a notice of non-completion from his architect, and in turn served a notice on the contractor under section 111, and deducted damages for non-completion from the next payment. The contractor said this was not allowed because the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Contract, Insolvency

Updated: 10 July 2022; Ref: scu.251484

Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another: CA 20 Dec 2006

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 1834

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd TCC 31-Aug-2005
A third party television company sought access to the particulars of claim and other pleadings.
Held: HH Judge Wilcox said: ‘There can be no legitimate distinction drawn between decisions made in interlocutory proceedings and those at final . .
Appeal from – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd TCC 5-Jun-2006
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd (No. 2) TCC 31-Jan-2007
. .
See Also – Multiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd TCC 8-Feb-2007
Application for permission to appeal. Jackson J considered whether permission to appeal should have been requested at the hearing: ‘It seems to me that I have got to interpret the provisions of Rule 52.3 and the provisions of the Practice Direction . .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Honeywell Control Systems Ltd (No. 2) TCC 6-Mar-2007
. .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd (No 3) TCC 12-Mar-2007
. .
See Also – Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd CA 27-Apr-2007
The court construed an agreement supplemental to a construction contract. . .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another CA 21-Dec-2007
. .
See Also – Multiplex Construction Ltd v Cleveland Bridge Ltd and Another CA 6-Feb-2008
. .
See Also – Multiplex Construction (Uk) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another TCC 7-Feb-2008
. .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another TCC 19-Mar-2008
. .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another (No 7) TCC 29-Sep-2008
Last stage of the Wembley stadium construction dispute. Jackson J, interpreting Carver said that it set out: ‘how the court ought to approach the matter in circumstances where: (a) one party has made an offer which was nearly but not quite . .
See Also – Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd v Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another TCC 29-Sep-2008
. .
See Also – Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd and Another v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd CA 19-Feb-2010
. .
See Also – Cleveland Bridge Uk Ltd and Another v Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd CA 31-Mar-2010
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.249113

Riverside Housing Association Ltd v Revenue and Customs: ChD 3 Oct 2006

The court was asked whether the building of a divisional head office for a charitable body, a social housing landlord, was zero-rated for VAT.
Held: Being a social landlord was not enough to qualify the landlord to be entering into construction ‘other than in the furtherance of a business’ for value-added tax purposes.

Judges:

Justice Lawrence Collins

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2383 (Ch), Times 01-Nov-2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, Construction

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.245175

Environment Agency v Lewin Fryer and Partners: TCC 6 Jul 2006

The defendants had started but abandoned a request against third parties, and had to pay their costs. It now sought those and its own costs from the claimant, saying that the abortive application would have been unnecessary had the claimant complied with its own disclosure obligations. The claimant said the court did not have jurisdiction to make such an order.
Held: The court had the power to make such an order, but only to the extent that the defendants’ action had been reasonable, and the result would be reasonable and appropriate. As regards the claimant’s main contractor, many of the documents were within the claimant’s control as the instructing client. The application by the defendant had been delayed as long as it could, and the claimant had not been open about its own discussions with its contractors about disclosure. As against subcontractors, the claimant did not have the same control, and a costs order against the claimants was not appropriate in those respects.

Judges:

peter Coulson QC J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1597 (TCC), (2006) 22 Const LJ 574

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 31 44.3

Litigation Practice, Costs, Construction

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.244135

Moon v Garrett and others: CA 28 Jul 2006

The defendant appealed a finding that he was liable for the personal injury to the claimant. The claimant was employed to collect blocks and bring them to the site. He fell and injured himself.
Held: The defendant, the occupier of the land, was liable. The claimant was clearly a person intended to be protected by the legislation.

Citations:

Times 01-Sep-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 1121, [2007] ICR 95

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Construction (Health Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996 (1996 No 1592) 6(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Davies v Forrett and Others QBD 23-Jun-2015
The claimant had been very severely injured as a passenger in a car (uninsured) which had attempted an overtaking manouvre past three cars. One pulled out, and the car in which he was a passenger swerved off the road and crashed. Damages were now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Construction, Land

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243996

London Recruitment Services Ltd v Revenue Customs: SCIT 7 Jun 2006

SCIT CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY CERTIFICATES – Preliminary issue being an appeal against Assessments under Regulation 14 of IT (Sub-contractors in the Construction Industry) Regs 1993 SI 1993/743 – Appeal dependent on whether Appellant’s contract for the supply of workers to it was a contract simply with one counter-party sub-contractor (which held a CIS 6 Certificate) or whether that sub-contractor was itself contracting as agent for numerous ’employing companies’ none of which held such certificates – Appeal allowed on the preliminary issue

Citations:

[2006] UKSPC SPC00546

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sub-contractors in the Construction Industry) Regs 1993 14

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.242832

Arnold (Inspector of Taxes) v G Con Ltd: CA 12 May 2006

The tax payer company had failed to send in pay as you earn and NI returns for three years. The commissioners had found this to be only a minor failure and that the company was entitled to an exemption certificate under the construction industry scheme to allow it to pay its staff without deduction of income tax and NI. The court at first instance found in favour of the inspector.
Held: The company’s appeal failed. To be entitled to a certificate the company had to show that it had complied with its statutory duties for three years. Unless any failure was minor and technical. The facts found by the commissioners did not support such a conclusion.

Judges:

Jonathan Parker LJ, Hughes LJ, Sir Peter Gibson

Citations:

Times 09-Jun-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 829

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income and Corporatin Taxes Act 1988 565

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Edwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Bairstow HL 25-Jul-1955
The House was asked whether a particular transaction was ‘an adventure in the nature of trade’.
Held: Although the House accepted that this was ‘an inference of fact’, on the primary facts as found by the Commissioners ‘the true and only . .
Appeal from – Arnold (Inspector of Taxes) v G Con Ltd ChD 4-Mar-2005
The revenue appealed against an order by the general commissioners to grant to the taxpayer, a construction industry subcontractor, a fresh exemption certficate where he had been consistently late in submitting tax and NI payments of several . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242629

Wiltshire County Council v Crest Estates Ltd and others: CA 5 Aug 2005

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1059

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Wiltshire County Council v Crest Estates Ltd. and others CA 5-Aug-2005
The builders had agreed as part of the planning process to indemnify the council against all claims incidental to the carrying out of the works for which permission was given. The council had to compulsorily purchase land, and sought repayment from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Construction

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.229214

Donnelly and others v Weybridge Construction Ltd: TCC 22 Mar 2006

Application for specific dicslosure order.

Judges:

His Honour Judge Coulson QC

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 721 (TCC), [2006] BLR 158

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Nottingham Building Society v Eurodynamics Systems plc 1993
The court laid down tests for the granting of mandatory interim injunctions. The court should consider whether there was a high degree of confidence that the applicant would succeed in establishing his right at trial. The higher that confidence, the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Dolphin Quays Developments Ltd v Mills and others CA 17-May-2007
The owner had agreed to sell a long lease of an apartment to the defendant. Part of the price was to be by way of set off of an existing debt, but ths was not set out in the contract. The claimant bought the land and the benfit of the contract from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240451

Revenue and Customs v Facilities and Maintenance Engineering Ltd: ChD 30 Mar 2006

The contractor sought an exemption certificate. The revenue refused it saying that he had failed to make the appropriate returns, and now appealed the General Comissioners’ decision to issue one.
Held: This was not a situation where there was any discretion. The section was rigorously prescriptive save only where a failure was ‘minor and technical’. Payments had been late for 32 out of 34 months.

Judges:

Park J

Citations:

Times 18-Apr-2006, [2006] EWHC 689 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 565

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240432

Gurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd. and Another (No. 2): TCC 15 Mar 2006

The parties were awaiting the handing down of the judgment, and were negotiating and settled their differences.
Held: Whilst the court welcomed settlements, a good deal of judicial time had been wasted. Parties entering into negotiations which they anticipate will settle the matter, should notify the court so that the judge might delay working on a judgment until it was known whether it was to be needed.

Judges:

Peter Coulson QC J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 536 (TCC), Times 24-Apr-2006

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Gurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd Gleeds Management Services Ltd QBD 25-Jan-2006
It is not necessary for a party to seek permission to rely upon an expert’s report, when disclosed by another party, even though the court has not given anyone specific permission to do so. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.239324

Gurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd Gleeds Management Services Ltd: QBD 25 Jan 2006

It is not necessary for a party to seek permission to rely upon an expert’s report, when disclosed by another party, even though the court has not given anyone specific permission to do so.

Judges:

His Honour Peter Coulson QC

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 43 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Gurney Consulting Engineers (A Firm) v Gleeds Health and Safety Ltd. and Another (No. 2) TCC 15-Mar-2006
The parties were awaiting the handing down of the judgment, and were negotiating and settled their differences.
Held: Whilst the court welcomed settlements, a good deal of judicial time had been wasted. Parties entering into negotiations which . .
Cited – Dar v Vonsak and Another QBD 17-Dec-2012
The second defendant insurers appealed against a refusal by the court to allow it to withdraw an admission of liability in respect of a road traffic accident. The insurer said that the fact that it now saw the accident as fraudulent was an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238467

Aviva Insurance Ltd v Hackney Empire Ltd: CA 19 Dec 2012

This appeal concerns a bond given to secure the performance of a construction contract. The bondsman appeals against a decision that it remains liable under the bond, despite the fact that the employer paid to the contractor additional sums which were not due under the contract. There are also issues concerning the extent of the bondsman’s liability; these issues turn upon the meaning and effect of the termination provisions in the construction contract.

Judges:

Sir John Thomas P, Moses, Jackson LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1716, [2013] 1 EGLR 101, [2013] 2 EG 66, [2013] BLR 57, [2013] WLR(D) 2, [2013] 1 WLR 3400, 146 Con LR 1

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Construction

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.467186

Century Builders Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 23 Aug 2010

Construction Industry Scheme – penalties for late filing of return required by paragraph 4 of the Income Tax (Construction Industry Scheme) Regulations 2005 taxpayer registered for filing on line therefore no prompt by HMRC – whether a reasonable excuse under s.118(2) TMA 1970 – no

Citations:

[2010] UKFTT 415 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.426544

Eurotec Services and Eurotec Services (GB) Llp v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 8 Jul 2010

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY SCHEME – partnership changed to Limited Liability Partnership – LLP took on a further partner and changed its year end- appellant relied on accountant to finalise the accounts and advise amount of tax due- accountant failed to appeal removal of gross payment status – further accountants instructed for LLP – LLP suffered a substantial bad debt when MFI went into receivership – appellant alleged reasonable excuse for failure to pay income tax and penalties giving rise to non-compliance -appeal dismissed – no reasonable excuse.

Citations:

[2010] UKFTT 321 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Income Tax, Construction

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.422307

Bella Casa Ltd v Vinestone Ltd and others: TCC 9 Dec 2005

Judges:

His Honour Peter Coulson Q.C.

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2807 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Defective Premises Act 1972

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – McLoughlin v Jones; McLoughlin v Grovers (a Firm) CA 2002
In deciding whether a duty of care is established the court must go to the ‘battery of tests which the House of Lords has taught us to use’, namely: ‘. . the ‘purpose’ test (Banque Bruxelles Lambert SA v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd); the ‘assumption . .
Cited – Bayoumi v Protim Services Limited CA 6-Nov-1996
The county court judge had allowed damages to the claimant, who owned a property which suffered from persistent water penetration, general damages for breach of the 1972 Act, the sum of andpound;1,500 a year for the four years during which the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236321

Offer-Hoar, Technotrade Ltd and others v Larkstore Ltd, Bess Ltd: TCC 2 Dec 2005

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2742 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal From – Technotrade Ltd v Larkstore Ltd CA 27-Jul-2006
A claim was made for damages arising from building operations. Question as to legal effect of assignment of cause of action. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Contract

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235548

Cantrell (T/A Foxearth Lodge) v Commissioners Of Customs and Excise: ChD 6 Mar 2003

Exemption was sought from liability for VAT on a new building erected at the taxpayer’s nursing home.
Whether the goods and services supplied to the appellants in the course of the construction of buildings on their property at Woodbridge, Suffolk are zero-rated. The Tribunal held that they were not.

Judges:

The Vice-Chancellor

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 404 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

VAT Act 1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

VAT, Construction

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.342130

The Royal Brompton Hospital National Health Service Trust v Hammond and Others: CA 23 May 2001

Citations:

[2001] CA Civ 778

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – The Royal Brompton Hospital National Health Service Trust v Hammond and Others (No 5) CA 11-Apr-2001
When looking at an application to strike out a claim, the normal ‘balance of probabilities’ standard of proof did not apply. It was the court’s task to assess whether, even if supplemented by evidence at trial, the claimant’s claim was bound to fail . .
See Also – Royal Brompton Hospital National Health Trust v Hammond etc TCC 8-Jan-1999
. .
See Also – Royal Brompton Hospital National Health Trust v Hammond and others TCC 9-Dec-1999
. .
See Also – The Royal Brompton Hospital NHS Trust v Hammond and Others TCC 18-Dec-2000
. .
See Also – Royal Brompton Hospital National Health Service Trust v Hammond and others CA 9-Feb-2001
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Royal Brompton Hospital National Health Service Trust v Hammond and others HL 25-Apr-2002
The claimants sought damages against the defendants for their late delivery of a building. The contractors sought to share the damages with the architects who had certified the delays, defeating their own claims.
Held: The Act sought to extend . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235026

Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard Ltd: CA 16 Nov 2005

The parties had disputed payments for subcontracting work on a major project. The matter had been referred to arbitration, and the claimants now appealed refusal of leave to appeal the adjudicator’s award.
Held: The dispute was complex and substantial. Nevertheless, the adjudicator ‘not only took the initiative in ascertaining the facts but also applied his own knowledge and experience to an appreciation of them and thus, in effect, did BB’s work for it.’ The arbitration system was intended to provide speedy resolution of disputes. They dealt with cases which would often be necessarily complex, and parties should not be encouraged to trawl through judgments for minor errors. Awards should be set aside only in a case of clear error, which was not present here. Leave refused.
Chadwick LJ said: ‘the objective which underlies the Act and the statutory scheme [for adjudication] requires the courts to respect and enforce the adjudicator’s decision unless it is plain that the question in which he is decided was not the question referred to him or the manner in which he has gone about his task is obviously unfair. It should be only in rare circumstances that the court will interfere with the decision of an adjudicator.’

Judges:

Sir Anthony Clarke MR, Chadwick LJ, Moore-Bick LJ

Citations:

Times 24-Nov-2005, [2005] EWCA Civ 1358, [2006] BLR 15, (2005) 104 Con LR 1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 108, Scheme of Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998 (SI 1998/649).

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Tally Wiejl (UK) Ltd v Pegram Shopfitters Ltd CA 21-Nov-2003
. .
Appeal from – Carillion Construction Ltd v Devonport Royal Dockyard TCC 26-Apr-2005
Application for leave to appeal against arbitrator’s award in construction dispute.
Held: The appeal was declined. . .
Cited – Macob Civil Engineering Ltd v Morrison Construction Ltd TCC 12-Feb-1999
Once made, an award by an adjudicator under the Scheme was enforceable immediately and should be enforced by writ and application for summary judgment, provided only that the arbitrator had jurisdiction to make the award. It remained payable . .
Cited – Bouygues UK Limited v Dahl-Jensen UK Limited TCC 17-Dec-1999
An arbitrator had made an award, the consequence of which, it was claimed, would lead to a retention being released before it was actually due. It was claimed that this part of the award was outside the adjudicator’s jurisdiction.
Held: . .
Cited – Bouygues (Uk) Ltd v Dahl-Jensen (Uk) Ltd (In Liquidation) CA 17-Aug-2000
When the decision of an adjudicator was challenged, the court should ask whether the adjudicator had either asked the right question but in the wrong way, or whether he had even answered the wrong question. The procedure was intended to provide a . .
Cited – C and B Scene Concept Design Ltd v Isobars Ltd CA 31-Jan-2002
The claimant appealed a refusal of summary judgement, in a claim to enforce an arbitration award. Where an award was challenged, enforcement should still be allowed to continue unless the challenge went as to the jurisdiction of the reference. . .
Cited – Ferson Contractors Limited v Levolux A T Limited CA 22-Jan-2003
. .
Cited – AMEC Capital Projects Ltd v Whitefriars City Estates Ltd CA 28-Oct-2004
Alleged bias and procedural unfairness by an adjudicator appointed to determine a dispute in relation to a construction contract.
Held: The principles of the common law rules of natural justice and procedural fairness were two-fold. A . .
Cited – Discain Project Services Ltd v Opecrime Development Ltd TCC 1-Aug-2000
The applicant sought leave to defend the enforcement of an arbitration award.
Held: The adjudicator had accepted oral and written communications with one party, from which the other party was excluded. This was such a serious breach of the . .
Cited – Balfour Beatty Building Ltd v Chestermount Properties Ltd 1993
It was argued that the party seeking a referral to arbitration need only rely on the existence of relevant events for its entitlement to an extension of time and has no regard for any delay for which it may be culpable and which may impact at the . .
Cited – Henry Boot Construction v Malmaison Hotel (Manchester) Ltd TCC 1999
. .
Cited – Royal Brompton Hospital National Health Trust v Hammond etc TCC 8-Jan-1999
. .
Cited – Discain Project Services Ltd v Opecrime Development Ltd TCC 11-Apr-2001
. .
Cited – Fox v Wellfair Ltd CA 1981
An expert arbitrator should not in effect give evidence to himself without disclosing the evidence on which he relies to the parties, or if only one to that party. He should not act on his private opinion without disclosing it. It is undoubtedly . .
Cited – Interbulk Limited v Aiden Shipping Co Limited (The ‘Vimeira’) CA 1984
The court considered whether an arbitrator had a duty to raise a point missed by counsel.
Held: Robert Goff LJ: ‘In truth, we are simply talking about fairness. It is not fair to decide a case against a party on an issue which has never been . .
Cited – Glencot Development and Design Ltd v Ben Barrett and Son (Contractors) Ltd TCC 13-Feb-2001
. .
Cited – Kye Gbangbola and Lisa Lewis v Smith Sherriff Limited TCC 20-Mar-1998
‘A tribunal does not act fairly and impartially if it does not give a party an opportunity of dealing with arguments which have not been advanced by either party’. . .
Cited – John Barker Construction Ltd v London Portman Hotel Ltd 1996
An architect who had to decide whether to grant an extension of time under clause 25 of the JCT conditions would not have acted fairly and lawfully and his decision would be fundamentally flawed if he had not carried out a logical analysis in a . .
Cited – Swain v Hillman CA 21-Oct-1999
Strike out – Realistic Not Fanciful Chance Needed
The proper test for whether an action should be struck out under the new Rules was whether it had a realistic as opposed to a fanciful prospect of success. There was no justification for further attempts to explain the meaning of what are clear . .

Cited by:

Cited – Shaw and Another v Massey Foundation and Pilings Ltd TCC 12-Mar-2009
The appellants had argued that they were not subject to the construction arbitration system because they were residential occupiers. They now said that as consumers vis a vis the construction contract. . .
Cited – Cantillon Ltd v Urvasco Ltd TCC 27-Feb-2008
After referring to the Carillion Construction case, the court held: ‘Whilst that case is, obviously, not authority for the proposition that a ‘good’ challenge to a decision on jurisdiction or natural justice grounds will be excluded on some . .
Cited – CRJ Services Ltd v Lanstar Ltd (T/A CSG Lanstar) TCC 19-Apr-2011
The claimant hired out recycling plant and equipment and the defendant had been a customer. A local agent of the defendant had properly entered into certain contracts with the claimant acting as the company’s agent, but then created three long term . .
Cited – Alexander and Law Ltd v Coveside (21BPR) Ltd TCC 12-Dec-2013
The claimant sought to enforce an arbitration award. The respondent resisted, saying that the claimant faced unresolved insolvency proceedings, and may be unable to repay any sum later found due. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Arbitration

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.234994

Wates Construction Ltd v HGP Greentree Allchurch Evans Ltd: TCC 10 Oct 2005

A unit constructed by the claimant had collapsed under a weight of rainwater. It had been constructed according to a design provided by the defendants. The claimants had discontinued the action on the morning of the trial, and the defendants now sought costs on an indemnity basis.
Held: An order for indemnity costs may only be made where a party maintains a claim or application which it knew or ought to have known was doomed to fail on its facts and on the law.
The pursuit of a weak claim will not usually, on its own, justify an order for indemnity costs, provided that the claim was at least arguable. But the pursuit of a hopeless claim (or a claim which the party pursuing it should have realised was hopeless) may well lead to such an order.

Judges:

Peter Coulson QC

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2174 (TCC), [2006] BLR 45, 105 Con LR 47

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Atlantic Bar and Grill Ltd v Posthouse Hotels Ltd 2000
The third defendant sought an order that the costs of the claim for an injunction against him, once it was discontinued on the second day of trial, should be assessed on an indemnity basis.
Held: The order should be made. The power of the . .
Cited – Reid Minty (a firm) v Taylor CA 2002
New CPR govern Indemnity Costs awards
The defendant had successfully defended the main claim and now appealed against the refusal of an order for costs on an indemnity basis even though judge thought that the claimants had behaved unreasonably. He had said that some conduct deserving of . .
Cited – Kiam II v MGN Ltd (2) CA 6-Feb-2002
An appeal against a damages award in a defamation case had been unsuccessful. The claimant now appealed for the award of indemnity costs. The claimant had made an offer of compromise, which had been ignored by the defendant.
Held: If a party . .

Cited by:

Cited – Evans and Others v The Serious Fraud Office QBD 12-Feb-2015
The claimants had had criminal charges brought against them by the defendants. A court had ordered them discharged, but the defendant had recommenced proceedings and these second set of proceedings had also been dismissed by the court. They now . .
Cited – Elvanite Full Circle Ltd v AMEC Earth and Environmental (UK) Ltd TCC 14-Jun-2013
Following the proncipal judgment there were disputes as to the basis of assessment of costs and the interaction between the existing costs management order (which approved the defendant’s budget costs of andpound;264,708) and the total costs now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Professional Negligence, Costs

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.231287

Newman College In the University of Cambridge v Customs and Excise: VDT 14 Feb 2005

VDT Landlord Property – Construction and renovation of library by College – Irrecoverable VAT – Lease of library to subsidiary company – Election to waive election – Arrangements for subsidiary company to provide library services to College – Whether election to waive exemption disapplied under Sch 10, para 2(3AA) VATA 1999 – Yes – Whether tax mitigation scheme not in accordance with Sixth Directive – yes – Appeal dismissed

Citations:

[2005] STI 816, [2005] BVC 2374, [2005] V and DR 36, [2005] UKVAT V18936

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

VAT, Construction

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.230214

Actionstrength Limited v International Glass Engineering, In Gl En SPA, Saint-Gobain Glass UK Limited: CA 10 Oct 2001

The claimant sought payment for works undertaken. They had been given a promise that in return for not withdrawing their workforce from the site, the second defendants would redirect payments due to the first defendant to the claimant. When it came to it, they asserted that that agreement was void under the Act since it was not evidenced in writing. At this stage the issue was whether the agreement was a guarantee or an agreement accepting a primary obligation. They answered that since the liability was contingent upon non-payment it was not a primary obligation. Held In these cases the court must look to the substance more than the form. The agreement fell within the act, and no estoppel arose.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Peter Gibson and Lord Justice Tucke

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1477, [2002] 1 WLR 566, [2002] TCLR 10, [2002] 4 All ER 468, [2002] BLR 44, [2002] CLC 153

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Statute of Frauds 1677 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Motemtronic Limited v Autocar Equipment Limited CA 20-Jun-1996
The parties said: ‘Mrs Ford: Where would money come from if M [the principal debtor] had to repay andpound;1 million? Colin Searle [the second defendant, M’s chairman]: From wherever in the group the money was at the relevant time. I’ll make sure it . .
Cited – Harburg India Rubber Comb Co v Martin CA 1902
The defendant had been a member of a syndicate which owed money to the plaintiff. The plaintiff obtained judgment against the syndicate and tried (unsuccessfully) to execute a writ of fi fa. The defendant then gave an oral promise that, if the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Actionstrength Limited v International Glass Engineering In Gl En SpA and others HL 3-Apr-2003
Actionstrength agreed with Inglen to provide construction staff to build a factory for St-Gobain. Inglen failed to pay. Actionstrength claimed against for the amount due. Inglen went into liquidation. The claim was now against St-Gobain. The claim . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Construction, Estoppel

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.166541

Bryen and Langley Ltd v Boston: CA 29 Jul 2005

The special facts surrounding the agreement of the standard term at issue were such that the court held that it could not possibly say that there had been a breach of the principle of fair dealing and that rendered it unnecessary for the court to consider whether on an objective assessment, the term caused a significant imbalance between the parties to the detriment of the consumer.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Pill Mr Justice Rimer

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 973, [2005] BLR 508

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Bryen and Langley Limited v Boston TCC 4-Nov-2004
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National Plc and seven Others ComC 24-Apr-2008
The Office sought a declaration that the respondent and other banks were subject to the provisions of the Regulations in their imposition of bank charges to customer accounts, and in particular as to the imposition of penalties or charges for the . .
Cited – Office of Fair Trading v Foxtons Ltd ChD 17-Jul-2008
Complaint was made that the Foxtons standard terms of acting in residential lettings were unfair. Foxtons objected to the jurisdiction of the Claimant to intervene.
Held: On a challenge to an individual contract, the court would be able to see . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Contract, Consumer

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.229148

Brian Warwicker Partnership v HOK International Ltd: CA 27 Jul 2005

The claimant partnership had sought a contribution from the defendants to the damages awarded against it.
Held: The section made allowance for non-causative factors when calculating a contribution, but the extent to which they should be allowed for was restricted.

Judges:

Arden, Keene LJJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 962, Times 19-Sep-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Binding – Re-Source America International Ltd. v Platt Site Services Ltd. and Another, Barkin Construction Ltd CA 2-Jun-2004
‘Section 2 of the 1978 Act is not expressed exclusively in terms of causative responsibility for the damage in question, although obviously the court must have regard to this, as the section directs, and it is likely to be the most important factor . .
Cited – Madden v Quirk QBD 1989
The plaintiff had been riding as a passenger in the open part of a pick up truck which crashed.
Held: The passenger contributed significantly (85%) to his own injuries by choosing an unsafe mode of travel. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Carisbrooke Shipping Cv5 v Bird Port Ltd ComC 13-Sep-2005
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Construction

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.229023

Wimbledon Construction Company 2000 Ltd. v Vago: TCC 20 May 2005

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1086 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Alexander and Law Ltd v Coveside (21BPR) Ltd TCC 12-Dec-2013
The claimant sought to enforce an arbitration award. The respondent resisted, saying that the claimant faced unresolved insolvency proceedings, and may be unable to repay any sum later found due. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction, Arbitration

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228354

Daly and Another v Sheikh: CA 24 Oct 2002

Application for leave to appeal

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1630

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Daly, Daly v Sheikh CA 13-Feb-2004
. .
See Also – Daly and Another v Sheikh CA 7-May-2002
Application for leave to appeal . .

Cited by:

See Also – Daly, Daly v Sheikh CA 13-Feb-2004
. .
See Also – Daly and Another v Sheikh CA 7-May-2002
Application for leave to appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Construction

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.217662

Mccook v Lobo and others: CA 19 Nov 2002

The defendant was the occupier of premises. He did not direct how the work should be done and was not present at the time the work was being performed.
Held: He had not been in control of the relevant work. Judge LJ referred to Regulation 4(2) of the 1996 Regulations and said: ‘The requisite level of control before the duty does arise, however, is linked to the way in which construction work is carried out and it is confined to construction work within the individual’s control. For this purpose the obvious person who controls the way in which construction work on site is carried out is an employer. The employer owes express duties under regulation 4(1). That, therefore, identifies the starting point. But someone who is not an employer may also be bound by the statutory obligation under regulation 4(2). Whether the appropriate level of control over the work is or should be exercised by an individual other than an employer so as to create the duty to comply with the obligations under regulation 4(2) is, in my judgment, a question of fact. It is not answered affirmatively by demonstrating that an individual has control over the site in a general sense as an occupier, or that as the occupier of the site he was entitled to ask or require a contractor to remove obvious hazards from the site. The required control is related to control over the work of construction’
Hale LJ underlined that the issue of control was an issue of fact, saying: ‘Regulation 4(2) of the 1996 Regulations to my mind depends entirely on the question of factual control.’

Judges:

Judge LJ, Hale LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1760, [2003] ICR 89

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Ferguson v Welsh HL 29-Oct-1987
The plaintiff sought damages for personal injury. A council had engaged a competent contractor to carry out demolition works. Unknown to the council, the contractor sub-contracted the works to two brothers who worked in a highly dangerous manner. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Gray v Fire Alarm Fabrication Services Ltd and others QBD 3-Mar-2006
The deceased, a maintenance engineer died after falling through a skylight at work. The court considered the respective liabilities of his employer and the landowner. . .
Cited – Gray v Fire Alarm Fabrication Services Ltd and others QBD 3-Mar-2006
The deceased, a maintenance engineer died after falling through a skylight at work. The court considered the respective liabilities of his employer and the landowner. . .
Cited – Kmiecic v Isaacs QBD 12-Mar-2010
The claimant sought damages after suffering injury when falling from a ladder working on the uninsured builder’s site. He sued the owners of the property, saying that by refusing to allow or pay for the work to be conducted in safer ways, she had . .
Cited – Barrett v Kirklees Metropolitan Council Admn 12-Mar-2010
The claimant challenged the policy of the defendant to pay support to special guardians appointed under the 2002 Act at two thirds only of the rate it paid in fostering allowance.
Held: The policy was a substantial and insufficiently justified . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Construction, Health and Safety

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.217850

Eribo and Another v Odinaiya and Another: TCC 19 Feb 2010

Dispute arising out of design and refurbishment works carried out by the First or Second Defendants at the Claimant’s home. There is a wide range of issues to be decided but the essence of the case is that the Claimants allege that the work done was late, was grossly defective and requires extensive and costly remedial works. Those allegations are, in the main, denied and a Counterclaim is brought to recover alleged under-payment.

Judges:

Acton Davis QC HHJ

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 301 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Construction

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.401932