Registration and coffee
Construction: Shaping New Law into Solution-Focused Advice for Your Clients
Thu 12 July 2018
The Caledonian Club 9 Halkin Street London SW1X 7DR
Answers to 13 Thorny Questions: Directly from 5 QCs and 2 Solicitors of Outstanding Ability
Construction: Shaping new law into solution-focused advice for your clients
Chaired by: Jonathan Hosie of Mayer Brown
Drawing on the North Midland Building case, why do you need to amend concurrent delay allocation clauses in the standard forms?
Or is it simply a matter for litigators?
Answered by: Marion Smith QC of 39 Essex Chambers
Using real-life examples, how can you assign the benefits of construction contract, so as to avoid the wrangling evident in the Mailbox v Galliford Try litigation?
Answered by: Paul Darling OBE QC of 39 Essex Chambers
What are the options for a "smash and grab" adjudication following the Grove Developments v S&T litigation for those (1) claiming money and (2) defending against it?
Answered by: Andy Mather of Macfarlanes
MT Hojgaard decision
Concentrating on the standard forms, when do "fitness for purpose" obligations vitiate "reasonable care and skill" obligations and vice versa (with reference to the MT Hojgaard decision)?
Is there a solution?
Answered by: Ben Patten QC of 4 New Square
In light of the Carillion collapse, are on-demand performance bonds worthwhile?
What other forms of performance security should clients consider?
Answered by: David Sears QC of Crown Office Chambers
How has the risk profile of the NEC4 and new FIDIC suite of contracts changed, with reference to (1) dispute avoidance, (2) compensation, (3) design responsibility, (4) payment notices?
Answered by: David Savage of Charles Russell Speechlys
Close of conference