Image of judge gavel with construction hat

Case Update: MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd v Balfour Beatty Kilpatrick Ltd (2020)

The judgment given in the Technology and Construction Court in Clancy Docwra Limited v E.ON Energy Solutions Limited provides a detailed examination of the extent of a party’s obligations and shows the importance of tender stage clarity surrounding what is the scope of the contract works and what is excluded.

Image of judge gavel with construction hat

Case Update: PBS Energo A.S. v Bester Generacion UK Ltd

The judgment given in the Technology and Construction Court in Clancy Docwra Limited v E.ON Energy Solutions Limited provides a detailed examination of the extent of a party’s obligations and shows the importance of tender stage clarity surrounding what is the scope of the contract works and what is excluded.

Image of judge gavel with construction hat

Case Update: Clancy Docwra Limited v E.ON Energy Solutions

The judgment given in the Technology and Construction Court in Clancy Docwra Limited v E.ON Energy Solutions Limited provides a detailed examination of the extent of a party’s obligations and shows the importance of tender stage clarity surrounding what is the scope of the contract works and what is excluded.

Image of judge gavel with construction hat

Case Update: No Oral Modification Clauses

The judgement made by the Supreme Court in Rock Advertising Ltd v MWB Business Exchange Centres Ltd1 has provided valuable clarification that will have a widespread impact for contracting parties with respect to oral variations.

Image of judge gavel with construction hat

Am I insured under a Project Insurance Policy?

The recent case of Haberdashers’ Aske’s Federation Trust Ltd and others v Lakehouse Contracts Ltd and others1 afforded the court with an opportunity to consider a sub-contractors immunity to subrogated claims against him if co-insured under a project insurance policy.

Image of judge gavel with construction hat

Case Update: Pay Less Notices, Smash and Grab Adjudications, and the Levying of Liquidated Damages

The latest decision by the Hon Mr Justice Coulson in Grove Developments Ltd v S&T (UK) Ltd1 in the TCC provided valuable clarification on Pay Less Notices, ‘smash and grab’ adjudications and liquidated damages under JCT contracts.

Welcome Niall Tiernan

Welcome Niall Tiernan

We are pleased to welcome Niall Tiernan to the Tudor Rose team. Niall joined us on 1 May 2018 as a Senior Consultant with experience providing commercial and dispute resolution support to clients engaged in a wide variety of construction and engineering projects. We wish Niall all the best in his new role at Tudor […]

New Team Members

We are pleased to welcome David Clancy and Daniela Stambrow to the Tudor Rose team. David is an experienced Quantity Surveyor and joins us as a Senior Consultant. He has experience both in the UK and internationally, supporting contractors and employers as well as working on Expert commissions. Daniela joins us as Commission Support Assistant, […]

Employees’ Graduation

Congratulations to Tudor Rose team members, Christina Noble and Samantha Stearn, on achieving their master degrees in Construction Law and Practice. You have made us proud!

Image of judge gavel with construction hat

The Rise and Fall of Cost Recovery in Adjudication

Since the introduction of statutory adjudication in the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, parties have been trying to find ways of recovering the costs incurred in referring or defending a dispute in adjudication. An early decision in John Cothliff Limited v Allen Build (Northwest) Limited1  suggested that the adjudicator did have the jurisdiction […]