Our collective thoughts

Posted April 8, 2026 | Published in Contracts & documentation

No April Fools: TCC issues landmark decision on Building Liability Orders in Crest Nicholson v Ardmore [1]

Building Liability Orders, covered in a previous blog, are a significant departure from the traditional principle that a company is solely responsible for its own liabilities. In a landmark decision, the Technology and Construction Court has now granted both anticipatory and adjudication based BLOs in *Crest Nicholson Regeneration Ltd & Ors v Ardmore Construction Ltd (in administration) & Ors* [2026] EWHC 789 (TCC). This decision provides important guidance on the scope and application of the BLO regime under the Building Safety Act 2022.

In this article, Ben Smith, Huw Wilkins and Jonathan Clarke examine the judgment and discuss the key legal issues, as well as the practical implications for developers, contractors and associated companies.

Retentions to be banned: what next? [3]

In her latest blog, Claire King examines the Government’s decision to ban retention payments in construction contracts. She explores what this means for subcontractors, developers and the wider industry, and considers the challenges ahead as standard forms and quality control mechanisms adapt to a post‑retentions landscape.

The ICE Payment Notice Dispute Model Adjudication Procedure: Worth considering? [5]

In this blog, Claire King reviews the ICE’s recently published Payment Notice Dispute Model Adjudication Procedure, which deals specifically with smash and grab adjudications. She examines the Procedure in closer detail and reviews some of its key features, most notably its capped Adjudicator fees.

Late Payments: not such thin ice after all [6]

In August 2024, the Court of Appeal handed down its judgment in which it held that a contractor was entitled to terminate its employment based on just two late payments, each of which was rectified within 14 days. In our blog at the time, we explained how the decision was a stark warning to employers, with the Court of Appeal itself noting how the decision left them on thin ice in respect of late payments. However, the Supreme Court has now overturned the Court of Appeal’s decision and restored the leeway afforded to employers under the JCT contract.

Retentions: carry on consulting? [8]

In her latest blog, Claire King analyses the proposals made by the current Government in its recent consultation on late payments focussing specifically on its plans for retentions. Will action be taken this time and do the proposals look promising?

A new tool in town? The NEC Conflict Avoidance Option [9]

The NEC’s new Conflict Avoidance Clauses, for use with the NEC4 ECC form, were announced earlier this year and are intended to prevent the escalation of “disagreements” into “disputes”. In this blog, Claire King reviews how they are meant to operate in the context of contracts that are already subject to statutory adjudication and examines the extent to which parties should be adding them to their dispute resolution toolkit.

Can the First-tier Tribunal go on a frolic of its own? [10]

For anyone litigating claims in the FTT, the recent decision of the Upper Tribunal in the appeal of Monier Road Limited v Alexander Blomfield and Other Leaseholders [2025] UKUT 157 (LC) is required reading. It clearly sets out the limits on the FTT’s power to raise new points during proceedings and confirms that FTT proceedings in England and Wales are adversarial, and not inquisitorial.

In this article, Ben Smith, with contributions from Oliver Weisemann and Millie Nash, examines the judgment and discusses the key legal implications for those operating in the construction and property sectors.