This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes the announcement of closure plans for the Grenfell Tower Inquiry, a case in which the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) made the first reported finding of a ‘relevant liability’ for the purposes of section 130 of the Building Safety Act 2022 (BSA 2022) (381 Southwark Park Road v Click St Andrews), the publication of legislation that will empower the Scottish Government to implement a building safety levy, a case in which the Court of Appeal provided authoritative guidance on key principles applicable to construction all risks insurance policies (Sky UK v Riverstone), an announcement that the Cabinet Office will be hosting webinars on the implementation of the Procurement Act 2023, and the Society of Construction Law’s report on Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) practices within the UK construction and legal sectors.

This week’s edition of Construction weekly highlights includes analysis of a case in which the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) quantified a contribution claim against the manufacturer of a defective cladding system (Mulalley v Sto), draft regulations amending the Building Safety Levy (England) regime, a case in which the TCC was required to consider the validity and effects of a Final Statement issued under a Joint Contracts Tribunal (JCT) contract (Oakland Wantage v Stepnell), publication of a revised National Policy Statement for Ports by the Department for Transport (DfT), Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) reforms and new guidance for the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) regime under the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 (PIA 2025), Construction Leadership Council (CLC) commentary on supply chain pressures following new steel tariffs, and the Industry Safety Steering Group’s (ISSG) fifth independent report on culture change and building safety in the built environment.

This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes the announcement of the release date for the 2024 editions of the Minor Works Building Contract family by the Joint Contracts Tribunal (JCT), two sets of guidance published by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in relation to higher-risk buildings, a case in which the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) considered whether an adjudicator had exceeded the scope of the ‘slip rule’ (McLaughlin & Harvey v LJJ), and the publication of the UK Construction Monitor for the first quarter (Q1) of 2024 published by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS).

This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes a Mayor’s and City of London Court decision staying summary enforcement of an adjudication decision pending the Supreme Court’s judgment (Providence v Hexagon), the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)’s template access agreement and guidance for buildings covered by a Developer Remediation Contract (DRC), the Scottish Government's Cladding Remediation Directorate’s publication of its September 2025 management information for the Cladding Remediation Programme, the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB)’s publication of an economic report, ‘Capacity Constraints in Construction: Rethinking the Business Environment’, a consultation by the Construction Leadership Council (CLC) to review the priorities of the Construct Zero Performance Framework and the Department for Energy Security, Net Zero (DESNZ)’s policy statement on NESO’s role in strategic planning of hydrogen infrastructure, and the National Energy System Operator (NESO)’s updated connections reform timeline.

The following construction law resources, providing useful practical commentary, legislation, rules and guidance for construction lawyers, whether in private practice or in-house, are available in Lexis+® UK. They are referenced and linked to in the Construction content in Lexis+® UK. Please note, however, the titles listed can only be accessed with the relevant Lexis+® UK subscription(s). Commentaries Title Summary Who should use this resource? Emden’s Construction Law by Crown Office Chambers A detailed narrative exposition of the law in all key construction law areas, including: formation and parties; scope of obligations; termination, compensation and other matters; responsibilities of and liabilities to third parties; and dispute resolution—as well as commentary on all the major construction contracts. Construction lawyers advising on construction contracts and construction disputes. Manual of Construction Agreements (Cockram) Part A provides comprehensive commentary on the law and practice governing construction contracts, with a focus on the major standard form agreements. Written by Richard Cockram, one of the country’s leading construction lawyers. Part B comprises a comprehensive bank of expertly drafted amendments to the standard form agreements

FORTHCOMING CHANGES: In measures expected to come into force on 1 October 2026, time limits for making certain claims in employment tribunals in Great Britain (and, in certain cases, industrial tribunals in Northern Ireland) will be increased from three months to six months. The changes are set out in section 152 of the Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA 2025) and ERA 2025, Schedule 12 (not yet in force), and in The Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) (Amendment) Order 2026 (draft), The Employment Tribunal (Extension of Time Limits) (Miscellaneous Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2026 (draft) and The Employee Study and Training (Procedural Requirements) (Amendment) Regulations 2026, SI 2026/473. This Practice Note will be updated as soon as the relevant statutory instruments are made. For more information, see Practice Note: Employment Rights Act 2025—tracker. Dismissal of an employee by their employer will typically be at the instigation of the employer. In other words, the employer will terminate the contract of employment by their words or actions. That will amount

The situation whereby an employee elects to resign and terminate his relationship with the employer by reason of the conduct of the employer.

Constructive notice describes a situation where a person is treated in law as having knowledge of a fact, even though they do not actually know it, because they ought reasonably to have discovered it. It commonly arises in property, trusts, banking and insolvency law across England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Ireland, with broadly consistent usage.The concept is largely developed by case law rather than a single statutory definition. A party may have constructive notice where the circumstances would put a reasonable person on inquiry and proper enquiries, inspections or searches (for example, Land Registry or Registry of Deeds searches, company searches or investigating occupiers’ rights) would have revealed the relevant fact.Constructive notice is particularly important in determining priorities between competing interests in land, the liability of purchasers, mortgagees and solicitors, and whether a bona fide purchaser for value without notice is protected. It can also operate through imputed knowledge, where an agent (such as a solicitor) knows, or ought to know, something that is then attributed to the client. Failure to take reasonable steps to inform oneself may therefore expose a party to equitable claims or defeat priority they might otherwise have enjoyed.

A trust imposed on a person who holds the title to the property against his intention.

This Practice Note covers constructive trusts, which represent one of the three types of trust that do not require to be declared or evidenced in writing—the others being resulting trusts and implied trusts, although it is doubtful whether there is any form of implied trust which is not in fact either a constructive trust or a resulting trust. It examines what constitutes a constructive trust, when a constructive trust might arise or be imposed, what happens to unauthorised profits of a fiduciary, and the liability of third parties. In the Court of Appeal case of Paragon Finance v D B Thakerar & Co, Millett LJ subdivided types of constructive trust into two categories, distinguishing between: • the constructive trust proper, where equity intervenes to prevent the legal owner from unconscionably denying the beneficial interest of another (known as the institutional constructive trust) • the so-called constructive trust, where equity intervenes to provide relief against fraud by making those implicated in the fraud accountable as if they were trustees (known as the remedial constructive trust) Constructive trusts

Property Disputes analysis: O’Neill v Holland turned on the need to demonstrate detrimental reliance when attempting to establish the existence of a common intention constructive trust in a case where a property is held in a party’s sole name. This essential ingredient is sometimes overlooked, not least because it was not in issue in the leading cases of Stack v Dowden and Jones v Kernott. Detrimental reliance must be determined objectively. In this case, the claimant was able to rely on the change in position from living in a property owned by her father, to living in the same property in the sole name of her partner. The case is also a warning to parties to ensure that detrimental reliance is identified and pleaded clearly. Written by David Sawtell, barrister at 39 Essex Chambers.

This is the name given to the contractor in the PPC2000 suite of contracts.