Tim Elliott
Comment微密圈 Act: A pier entrance can be deceptive
Hastings council鈥檚 decision to close part of the town pier due to fears over its structural integrity put the provisions of the 微密圈 Act 1984 to the test - with perhaps surprising results
CommentLitigation privilege: Open secrets
If a document comes into existence for the purpose of litigation, privilege from disclosure can be claimed. But, as a recent case shows, it may be hard to persuade the court to allow the claim
CommentReasonable endeavours: So very obliged
How far does a party need to go to show it has used its best endeavours to do something - not, surely, to the point of ruining itself?
CommentWinning on penalties
锘縔ou may have agreed a sum for breach of contract, but there鈥檚 an old common-law doctrine that could see it struck down as a penalty. Fortunately this does not happen often, says Tim Elliott
CommentWell-defended settlements
Showing that settlement costs are unreasonable is a difficult task, as the installer of a defective sprinkler found when Siemens chased it for payment
CommentOff half-cock
You鈥檇 think that getting the contract right before beginning work was just common sense. Especially since, if you don鈥檛, the only people likely to win are the lawyers 鈥�
CommentHave wig, will travel
The increasingly mobile judges of the TCC are happy to do you a trial in the cheapest, most convenient part of the country. But how do you decide where that is?
- Comment
Legal costs: And you say we won?
As Costain vs Haswell shows, judges are using exact measures to work out who pays how much of the legal costs. The results should give a lot of litigants pause for thought
CommentTurning of the tide: Super litigation
Litigation is too often the meandering paddle steamer to adjudication鈥檚 inaccurate exocet. But a recent case shows courts can sometimes be both speedy and right
CommentWhat price victory? Winning back legal costs
You鈥檝e won a legal battle so it鈥檚 only reasonable you get your costs reimbursed, isn鈥檛 it? Ah, if only it were that simple
CommentFair enough?: Breaching natural justice
The case of Dorchester vs Vivid raised the familiar question of when an adjudication breaches natural justice. Here鈥檚 what the judge had to say鈥�
CommentPre-action protocol: How not to impress a judge
The pre-action protocol is a simple, practical measure that鈥檚 meant to save money and keep you lot out of court. So don鈥檛 go getting too clever about it
CommentGaymark: the story continues
Gaymark made it clear that an employer could not claim liquidated damages if it was responsible for the delay. Then Justice Jackson cast doubt on this ruling. So now where are we?
CommentTroubles along the way
A recent case involving temporary works, and what happens when they fail to do their job, casts some light on the tricky inspection obligations of professionals
CommentWho are you today?
Contract administrators are in the sometimes awkward position of having to act for the client one minute and being impartial the next. Here鈥檚 what happened when one got the balance wrong
CommentThe men with two heads
It seems that under most contracts, the contract administrator does really have to spend some time acting for the client and some time acting impartially
CommentAfter the fire
If your home goes up in smoke, you naturally expect that it will be rebuilt quickly. Here鈥檚 a case in which, after more than three years of bitter wrangling, the house is still a ruin
CommentFair, but harsh
If you spend money defending yourself against an unfounded charge, you ought to get your money back from whoever brought that charge. Well, you鈥檇 think so 鈥�
CommentSome kicks at clause 66
One of the fundamental rules of natural justice is that you have to listen to both sides of a case before reaching a judgment. Unless, of course, you are an engineer