header-logo header-logo

Building contract

11 January 2013
Issue: 7543 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Severfield – Rowen Structures Ltd [2012] EWHC 3652 (TCC), [2012] All ER (D) 239 (Dec)

In all delay cases it was necessary to show that the claiming party was delayed by the factors of which it complained; it did not follow as a matter of logic, let alone practice, on a construction or fabrication project, that, simply because a variation was issued or that information was provided later than programmed or that free issue materials were issued later in the programme than envisaged originally, the claimant was delayed. If the real cause of the delay was, for example, overwork or disorganisation within the claimant, the fact that there had been variations, late instructions or information or late issue of materials was simply coincidental

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll