Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Printer Friendly Version
Sean Brannigan QC at 4 Pump Court gives his views on construction disputes and suggests how proceedings could be improved.
Without doubt my favourite thing is the people you meet. Dealing with construction disputes means dealing on a day to day basis with clients and solicitors who are generally very down to earth, interesting and often enormous fun. You get to meet and sometimes even help quite an enormous range of people.
I would say the one that sticks out most for me is Walter Lilly & Co Ltd v Mackay and another company  EWHC 1773 (TCC),  All ER (D) 213 (Jul), where I led the team for the successful contractor. As anyone who has read the very entertaining judgment in the case might appreciate, the case was interesting and memorable—not only because of the forceful personalities involved and the ferocity of the fight that provoked, but also because it was something of a ‘refresher course’ for me in relation to just about every tricky bit of construction law.
Happily that replaces my previous most memorable case, my very first court outing, at the end of which I managed to get my client arrested for both perjury and attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Without a doubt the trend has been towards internationalisation. More and more money has flooded into the UK from overseas. In addition both English law and UK advocates appear to be being used more and more in disputes around the world.
The result is a very positive one, not just because of the additional work which increased internationalisation brings, but because it is driving radical and probably overdue changes in how advocates from this jurisdiction (and the Bar in particular) do their job. There is nothing quite like having to explain a ‘Bar Tradition’ to a bemused CEO of a Chinese or American Contractor to make you realise it is probably best if you never have to do so again.
Generally I would say no. In fact in my view the crop of judges we currently have in the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) are universally excellent. They are clever, practical, commercial and human and I think that is being reflected in judgments emerging from the TCC.
The one slight issue where I think further thought and assistance from the court might be needed is in the continuing thorny issue of concurrent delay. There remain a number of difficult issues in that area of the law which drive uncertainty. My suspicion is the court will seek in an appropriate case to grapple with those sorts of issues further.
I think most significant contracts would benefit from a clause agreeing at the start a ‘wise man/woman’ panel to operate as a Disputes Avoidance Board, dealing with disputes before they spiral out of control. That worked fantastically well with the 2012 Olympics building programme (a project which I am far from sure the construction industry got nearly enough credit for) and is fast becoming the preferred method of grappling with problems in big international projects.
I also think limiting all hearings to two weeks or less and banning the use of email from 6pm to 9am would be two very positive steps.
For me personally I think it will have relatively little impact, as quite a lot of what I will be doing in the next 12 to 18 months involves international projects. More generally though I suspect house building will take off in a big way and that will generate a fair amount of work.
I would always advise them to seek to pay me the very highest fee they possibly can for the work! That aside, I think communication and teamwork are the absolute key. In my experience the best results always come about in cases where a ‘team’ mentality and pretty rigorous management (of what is needed and when) has been adopted from the start and applied.
That way everybody is encouraged to ‘own’ the battle the team is in and to put their ideas and observations forward without fear of being thought stupid. It is amazing the points that get noticed and how much better the arguments can be honed whenever that is the approach.
Equally, one shouldn’t underestimate the positive effect of a team on a long case when pretty rigorous management of deadlines (with drafts required a sufficient time before final service for example) enables everybody to get home in time for kids’ bedtimes, football or just to have a life, as the case may be.
Interviewed by Rachel Moloney.
The views expressed by our Legal Analysis interviewees are not necessarily those of the proprietor.
This article was first published in LexisPSL Construction on 28 April 2014. Click here for a free one week trial of Lexis®PSL Construction.
0330 161 1234