Blog

Huw Wilkins and Jonathan Clarke provide an overview of PAS 9980:2026, the updated code of practice for fire risk appraisals of external walls. They consider the principal changes to the framework and how the revised guidance seeks to support more proportionate, consistent and evidence-based remediation decisions.

The fraud test for injuncting a bank from paying out on an On Demand Bond sets a high hurdle. However, the case law on injuncting the beneficiary of an On Demand Bond from making a call under the main construction contract itself has arguably eased the requirements in recent years. A new High Court decision in TTSJV v BapCo Refining B.S.C. has now reconciled the differing authorities and confirms that a seriously arguable breach of the underlying contract will not suffice to obtain an injunction. As Claire King explains, it now clear that such relief is only available where the right to call is clearly precluded by the underlying contract.

The TCC has handed down a landmark decision in Crest Nicholson v Ardmore, granting both anticipatory and adjudication based Building Liability Orders and providing important guidance on the scope and application of the BLO regime. This blog examines the judgment and what this decision means in practice for developers, contractors and associated companies.

Claire King examines the Government’s decision to ban retention payments in construction contracts.

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.

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.

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?

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.

In this article, Ben Smith, with contributions from Oliver Weisemann and Millie Nash, examines the judgment from Monier Road Limited v Nicholas Alexander Blomfield and Other Leaseholders and discusses the key legal implications for those operating in the construction and property sectors.

The UK Supreme Court handed down its much-anticipated judgment in the case of URS Corporation Ltd v BDW Trading Ltd [2025] UKSC 21. The appeal was heard by a full panel of 7 justices who dismissed URS’s appeal on all 4 grounds. The judgment runs to 88 pages and is a must read for anyone working in the construction sector. This article examines the judgment, discussing the key issues arising and practical implications for those likely to be affected, including developers, contractors, consultants and insurers.

Lucinda Robinson reports on the recent decision in Placefirst Construction Ltd v CAR Construction (North East) Ltd, which provides current TCC guidance on payment and pay less notices. It also serves as an example of the confusion caused when contractual payment processes are not followed properly.

BLOs represent a significant change from the usual principle that a company is solely responsible for its liabilities and allow the Court to hold associated companies accountable for building safety failings, following the “polluter pays” principle.  As the body of caselaw under the Building Safety Act 2022 begins to develop, the Court has now made the first BLO and provided