Scots law issues

Scots law issues

The Practice Notes in this subtopic provide an introduction to the key differences between Scots and English law for construction lawyers, and to particular features of Scots law that may be relevant to construction lawyers. These Practice Notes may be useful to both Scottish and English lawyers that require information on key Scots law issues, in the context of construction.

Construction contracts in Scotland

Though there is much in common between the law of Scotland and England, so far as construction law and construction contracts are concerned, there are nevertheless several important differences. These range from construction-specific matters, such as the application Scheme for Construction Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 1998, SI 1998/687 instead of the Scheme for Construction Contracts (England and Wales) Regulations 1998, SI 1998/649, through to differences in underlying common and statutory laws that will affect the drafting and formation of construction contracts, and execution of works. The most significant of these differences are considered in Practice Note: Key differences between Scots law and English law for construction lawyers. This looks at, among other things:

•
the Scheme for Construction Contracts (Scotland) Regulations 1998,

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Construction News

Welsh Government publishes Procurement Act 2023 guidance framework

The Welsh Government has published Procurement Act 2023 guidance, including a letter from Minister Jack Sargeant to public bodies. Dated 31 March 2025 and addressed to the chief executive, it directs public bodies to comply with the Social Partnership and Public Procurement (Wales) Act (SPPP Act) by consulting recognised trade unions or staff representatives when setting well-being objectives and making strategic decisions. Public bodies must also produce an annual compliance report outlining their compliance over the previous 12 months. Additionally, two guidances have been issued. The first outlines how contracting authorities should assess and exclude suppliers—including their associated or sub-contracted entities—if they pose risks related to delivery, integrity, public confidence, or national security. The second establishes a centralised debarment regime, under which a Minister of the Crown may list suppliers considered to pose an ongoing risk following detailed investigations and a clear appeals process. Contracting authorities are required to refer to this debarment list during procurement to prevent high-risk suppliers from participating.

Construction weekly highlights—29 May 2025

This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes a case in which the High Court enforced a loan agreement under the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 (HNW Lending v Lawrence), commentary on the creation of the National Infrastructure and Service Authority (NISTA), a case in which the High Court provided guidance on renunciation and affirmation of contracts, and the interpretation of guarantees (Chugga Chugg v Privinvest), and the launch of a consultation by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) on the introduction of a statutory build out framework for eligible residential developments.

MHCLG publishes first progress report on Grenfell Tower Inquiry recommendations

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has published its first progress report on the implementation of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry’s Phase 2 recommendations. The report also provides updates on Phase 1 recommendations related to Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) for vulnerable people in high-rise buildings. It outlines progress across four key areas: (1) the construction industry; (2) fire and rescue services; (3) response and recovery; and (4) vulnerable people. MHCLG intends to publish quarterly reports in February, May, September, and December until all recommendations are fully implemented, a process expected to take at least four years.

MHCLG clarifies position on roof gardens as storeys

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has issued an updated notice clarifying its position following the First-tier Tribunal’s decision on 3 July 2024, in Smoke House & Curing House, 18 Remus Road, London E3 2NF: LON/00BG/HYI/2023/0024. MHCLG acknowledges the need for legislative clarity and is consulting the Building Safety Regulator and other stakeholders on a proposal to amend the Higher-Risk Buildings (Descriptions and Supplementary Provisions) Regulations 2023, SI 2023/275, to confirm that roof gardens should not be classified as a storey when determining whether a building is a higher-risk building under section 120D of the Building Act 1984 (BA 1984) and section 65 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022). In the interim, MHCLG maintains that roof gardens are not considered storeys for these purposes, and advises the sector and regulatory bodies to continue following current guidance.