After over a decade of uncertainty, the High Court yesterday reined in the use of the quantum meruit remedy. A majority of the Court found that builders can no longer seek compensation on a quantum meruit basis in relation to works where the builder has accrued a right to payment under the contract. While builders can commence a claim … Read more
In Thio Keng Thay v Sandy Island Pte Ltd [2019] SGHC 175, the High Court of Singapore upheld a plaintiff’s common law right to recover damages for the cost of remedying defects, as this right had not been expressly excluded in the contract. This decision is consistent with the English law position, which allows an … Read more
London Construction partners, Nicholas Downing and James Doe, and professional support lawyers, Susannah Davis and Noe Minamikata, have authored the United Kingdom Correspondent’s Report for The International Construction Law Review Part 3 [2019]. Read more
In Lucas Earthmovers Pty Limited v Anglogold Ashanti Australia Limited [2019] FCA 1049, the Federal Court of Australia considered several issues that typically arise in large-scale resources projects. In so doing, it reinforced the sanctity of the agreed bargain between the parties and highlighted the inherent difficulties in proving the oft-claimed, but rarely successful, misleading … Read more
Herbert Smith Freehills’ Tokyo office has written an article on the recent case of Network Rail Infrastructure Limited v ABC Electrification [2019] EWHC 1769 (TCC) in which the English Courts adopted the natural meaning of ‘default’ in the definition of ‘Disallowed Costs’ in a contract modelled on the ICE Conditions of Contract, Target Cost version. Read more
London Construction partners, Nicholas Downing and David Nitek, have contributed a chapter in The International Comparative Legal Guide to: Construction & Engineering Law 2019, for which they are also contributing editors Read more
In Rubicon Vantage International PTE Ltd v Krisenergy Ltd [2019] EWHC 2012 (Comm), the court determined that the fact that a parent company, and not a financial institution, issued the guarantee was no reason to limit the terms of the guarantee. The wording of the guarantee was the key consideration when determining the scope of … Read more
The decision in (1) GPP Big Field LLP and (2) GPP Langstone LLP v Solar EPC Solutions SL (formerly known as Prosolia Siglio XXI) [2018] EWHC 2866 (Comm) has applied the Supreme Court’s recast penalties test from Makdessi1. The decision is one of the few construction cases that have applied Makdessi in determining whether liquidated … Read more
