Abstracts » Construction and materials industries

Bypass operation

Article Abstract:

The legal dispute between Guy's Hospital in London, England, and project manager P&O Developments and mechanical and electrical service engineers Austen Associates and Austen Associates Ltd highlights legal problems associated with recovering costs on construction projects where there have been lengthy delays. It is tempting to state that, if a consultant makes a mistake that causes delay and the client then makes a deal with a contractor to rescue the delay, the cost of the deal is reclaimable from the consultant. However, the actual loss caused by the consultant could be very different from the deal the client enters into to resolve the problem.

---

Cause for thought

Article Abstract:

It is often dangerous when dealing with legal issues in the construction industry to make assumptions about consecutive events. Above all, it should not be assumed that because one event followed another, the former caused the latter. This was highlighted in the case of Skandia Property (UK) and Vala Properties BV v Thames Water Utilities. Here, it was found that Thames Water was not liable to reimburse Skandia and Vala for costs of 213,000 pounds sterling associated with making good water damage after a water main owned by Thames Water burst.

---

Lawyers' love letters

Article Abstract:

The use of letters of intent can frequently cause significant problems in the UK construction industry. In many cases, these letters go a lot further than simple intent, confirming the completed negotiations that indicate a complete contract. It may take some time to prepare contract documentation, during which time a dispute may arise. It is then assumed that no contract came into existence, and this means that the adjudication and payment provisions of the Construction Act do not apply.

Letters of intent

Some parts © 2012 Advameg, Inc.