This document contains quick links to precedent schedules of amendments to various JCT 2024 and JCT 2016 standard form construction contracts. For our full selection of materials on the JCT 2024 and JCT 2016 contracts, see: JCT contracts 2024—overview and JCT contracts 2016—overview. For links to pdf reference copies of the JCT 2024 and JCT 2016 contracts, see Practice Notes: JCT contracts 2024—reference copies andJCT contracts 2016—reference copies. For the Scottish Building Contract Committee (SBCC) contracts, see also Practice Note: SBCC (Scottish Building Contract Committee) standard forms of contract and Precedents: Schedule of Amendments to SBCC Design and Build Contract for use in Scotland (DB/Scot) 2016, Schedule of Amendments to SBCC Standard Building Contract With Quantities for use

[To be typed on employer’s headed notepaper] [Enter employee name] [Enter employee address] Confidential: addressee only [Date] Dear [enter name of employee] Proposed change to your [contract of employment OR [enter details, eg holiday entitlement]] I refer to our meeting on [enter date] and my letter[s] dated [enter dates of letter(s) that have already been sent to the employee], [a copy OR copies] of which [is OR are] enclosed. [Set out details of any prior individual and collective consultation process that has taken place.] I understand that you have not agreed to the proposed change[s] set out in my letter[s]. As we have discussed, if agreement to the proposed changes cannot be reached with all affected employees

The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013 (CCR 2013), SI 2013/3134 distinguish between distance contracts, off-premises contracts and on-premises contracts. The client may have the benefit of cancellation rights if the retainer is a distance contract or off-premises contract. See Practice Note: Different types of cancellation rights—law firms. Off-premises contract The definition of off-premises contract has several alternatives: • contract concluded somewhere other than at your business premises in the simultaneous physical presence of you and the client • contract for which an offer was made by the client in your physical presence in a place somewhere other than at your business premises • contract concluded: ◦ at your business premises, or through any means of distance communication (eg telephone or email) or ◦ immediately after the client

Protective proceedings In the event that a limitation period is due to end shortly, it is possible for a party to bring ‘protective’ proceedings in order to ensure that their claim does not become time-barred. Ideally, a party will have complied with all their pre-action obligations (pursuant to the CPR as well as any other, for example, contractual requirements) but, given that the effect of a limitation period under the Limitation Act 1980 expiring is that it provides a defendant with a complete defence to the claim (assuming they elect to plead limitation as a defence), there are circumstances when it will likely be prudent for a claimant to issue such proceedings. Time stops running for limitation purposes when the claim is ‘brought’, which is the date when the claim form (together with the correct court fee) is received by the court for the purposes of issuing it. Assuming

Structure of development There are a number of ways in which the local authority (LA) and developer (D) could jointly procure the development of land owned by the LA. The structure will largely depend on each party’s contribution to the development and each party’s objective in the development. D’s commercial objectives will broadly be to extract development profit or to receive an ongoing income or a blend of both. The LA’s objective will be to extract best value for the public benefit out of the development either in terms of financial value, public amenity, or both. This in turn will inform the kind of ownership structure at the end of the development, for example: • a developer intending to extract development profit only may favour a clean break at the end of the development and therefore structure the development documentation in a way that they receive a development profit but have

See Practice Note: Remedies for connected lender liability in consumer credit. The Practice Note provides that under section 75 of the Consumer Credit

In considering this question, it will be necessary to consider the terms of the contract of employment of the employee in question. Statutory paid holiday entitlement The right under the Working Time Regulations 1998 (WTR 1998), SI 1998/1833 is to a total of 5.6 weeks' paid annual leave each 'leave year', made up of: • a basic entitlement to a minimum of four weeks' paid annual leave (20 days for a regular full-time worker), and • an additional entitlement to 1.6 weeks' paid annual

The Infrastructure Conditions of Contract (ICC) for Civil Engineering Works originated in 1945 as the ICE Conditions of Contract. Following various updates, 2014 saw a major revision and the publication of a new ‘With Quantities Version’ (see Practice Note: ICC With Quantities Version 2014). In June 2018, two new ICC contracts were published—the Target Cost (TC) Version and the Design and Construct Version (see Practice Note: ICC Design and Construct Version 2018). This Practice Note provides guidance on the ICC TC Version 2018. In 2011, the Association for Consultancy and Engineering published the first edition of the TC Version. That was based upon the ICE Conditions of Contract 7th edition and modified for target cost use. The 2018 TC Version is completely rewritten and follows the approach and drafting of the 2014 Without Quantities Version. However, the 2011 TC Version and the 2018 TC Version have the same collaborative approach of the parties jointly managing risk. Many clauses in the 2014 With Quantities Version and the 2018 TC Version are identical. However, changes relating

The Supreme Court has unanimously held that English law does not recognise the so-called ’Mackay v Dick principle', under which a party who wrongfully prevents a contractual condition from being satisfied is treated as if the condition had been fulfilled. The Court ruled that the sellers’ claims for payment of deposits could not succeed as debts and that their sole remedy was damages for breach of contract. The judgment emphasises that English contract law should rely on interpretation and implied terms rather than legal fictions and that rejecting the ’Mackay v Dick principle’ promotes certainty and consistency in commercial dealings. Tim Wright of Fladgate and David Bridge and Lisa Fox of CMS comment on the implications of the judgment.

This practical guidance relates to the Procurement Act 2023 regime As of 24 February 2025, the main provisions of the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023) are in force. Procurements begun on or after this date must be carried out under PA 2023 (where applicable), whereas those begun under the previous legislation (the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, SI 2015/102, the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016, SI 2016/274, the Concession Contracts Regulations 2016, SI 2016/273, and the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011, SI 2011/1848) must continue to be procured and managed under that legislation. This practical guidance focusses on public procurement under PA 2023. For practical guidance on the standstill period under the previous legislation, see Practice Note: The standstill period—pre-PA 2023 [Archived]. What is the standstill period? When a contracting authority reaches its decision on the award of a public contract subject to PA 2023, it must observe a standstill period before entering into the relevant contract, unless a specific exemption applies. A standstill period is not mandated, but may be observed voluntarily,

The Infrastructure Conditions of Contract (ICC) for civil engineering works originated in 1945 as the ICE Conditions of Contract. Following various updates, 2014 saw a major revision and the publication of a new ‘With Quantities Version’. In June 2018, two new ICC contracts were published—the Design and Construct (D&C) Version and the Target Cost Version (see Practice Note: ICC Target Cost Version 2018). This Practice Note provides guidance on the ICC D&C Version 2018. The 2018 D&C Version is not to be confused with the 2011 D&C Version, with its identical cover. That was essentially a reprint of the ICE Design and Construct Contract 2001. The 2018 edition is entirely different, building on the 2014 With Quantities Version (for more on which, see Practice Note: ICC With Quantities Version 2014) and with a far more collaborative approach to design. Many of the clauses in those two contracts are identical. Small changes are made to the text to emphasise the contractor’s design obligations—these are kept to the minimum and are only made where change is necessary. Scheme

This Practice Note explains why exclusion clauses are used in property contracts and when they may be of no effect, including at common law in the context of fraudulent misrepresentation. It also covers the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 (UCTA 1977) under which clauses purporting to exclude liability for misrepresentation are subject to a reasonableness test, and considers case law in respect of the Standard Conditions. Exclusion clauses aim to protect a party to a contract by excluding or limiting liability against claims for breach of contract or in tort. In the context of property contracts, exclusion clauses are typically ‘non-reliance’ clauses, designed to exclude the seller’s liability for misrepresentation. Typical wording is as follows: ‘…the buyer enters into this agreement solely as a result of their own inspection and on the basis of the terms of this agreement and not in reliance upon any representation or warranty written or oral or implied made by or on behalf of the seller (save for any representation or warranty contained in written replies given by the seller's solicitors