Construction analysis: The City of London Law Society (CLLS) has published an updated 2024 edition of the Letter of Intent. In this analysis, we analyse the changes that have been made.

This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes publication of the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)’s new Remediation Acceleration Plan aimed at identifying unsafe buildings and expediting the removal of unsafe cladding, a case where the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) enforced an adjudicator’s decision in favour of a claimant in administration, subject to a stay of execution (Malin v Volkerfitzpatrick), a case where the TCC granted declarations sought by an employer in relation to unlawful suspension and termination of a design and build contract and the contractor’s consequent repudiatory breach (BNP Paribas v Briggs & Forrester), publication by the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC) of a new practice note, focusing on the appointment of dispute boards and a review of the historic causes of insolvency, and analysis considering the lessons to be learned from recent case studies and the wider implications for key players in the industry.

Commercial analysis: A case brought to the Court of Appeal challenging the High Court’s decision on the scope of fiduciary duty, informed consent and dishonesty. The court clarified that agents must fully disclose commissions (including the amount and method of funding) to avoid breaching fiduciary duties. Engie Power could only be liable as an accessory if dishonest and the court found the limitation period began when commission was paid, not when the contract was signed. The appeal was allowed in part. Written by Alexander Whatley, barrister at 3PB Chambers.

This Practice Note examines why post-termination restrictions (restrictive covenants) may need to be included in contracts of employment, and the various types that are typically used. For information: • on construing post-termination restrictions, see Practice Note: Construing post-termination restrictions • on determining whether a post-termination restriction has been incorporated into the contract, see Practice Note: Incorporation of post-termination restrictions • on determining the reasonableness of post-termination restrictions, see Practice Note: Post-termination restrictions—reasonableness • on key decisions on the enforceability of post-termination restrictions, see Practice Note: Decisions on post-termination restrictions and garden leave in employment contracts The need for post-termination restrictions During employment, including any period of garden leave immediately prior to the termination of employment (see Practice Note: Garden leave and the right to work), an employee will be under various implied obligations to their employer. These duties will include: • the duty of fidelity, including an obligation not to compete (see Practice Note: The duty of fidelity and fiduciary duties), and • an obligation not to misuse confidential information (see Practice Note: Confidential information and trade

This week's edition of Banking and Finance weekly highlights includes: (1) LMA announces transition loans guidance for climate finance framework; (2) UNEP FI publishes third progress report on responsible banking principles; and (3) ISDA and Tokenovate launch taskforce to develop smart contract framework within CDM.

1 For the avoidance of doubt the documents comprising the

This week's edition of Construction weekly highlights includes two related Technology and Construction Court (TCC) decisions concerning an alleged error in an adjudicator’s decision, in respect of the disputed incorporation of a programme into a sub-contract (Kingsmead v Laycock), a TCC decision on whether a defendant had properly raised a jurisdictional challenge that it could rely on in adjudication enforcement proceedings (Murnells v Beale), analysis of the International Federation of Consulting Engineers (FIDIC)’s Practice Note III: Decisions: Preparation and Composition, publication of a Senedd analysis of the Building Safety (Wales) Bill, guidance from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) on reserving below-threshold competitions under the Procurement Act 2023, launch of Great British Energy (GBE)’s Strategic Plan setting its 2030 targets, and changes to the Construction Industry Training Board (CITB)’s funding and grants model.

ARCHIVED: This Checklist has been archived and is not maintained. This practical guidance relates to the pre-Procurement Act 2023 regime This Practice Note contains guidance relevant to public procurement exercises commenced before the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023) came into force on 24 February 2025. In-scope procurements begun on or after this date are governed by PA 2023. Under the transitional and savings provisions for PA 2023, the previous public procurement regimes continue to apply to the extent necessary to allow contracting authorities to complete and manage procurements commenced before PA 2023 came into force. This Practice Note should be read in that context. For background reading, see Practice Note: Introduction to the Procurement Act 2023—PA 2023. Further practical guidance on PA 2023 is set out in a separate subtopic, see: Procurement Act 2023—overview. Technical specifications under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 In public procurement procedures under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102, the subject-matter of a public contract is defined by reference to

A contractor or consultant’s standard of care in relation to design is a common source of disagreement between the parties to a construction project. In most cases the contractor or consultant will be trying to avoid accepting a 'fitness for purpose' obligation in relation to the design—either express or implied. This Practice Note examines what the so-called 'fitness for purpose' obligation is, who is subject to it and who isn't, where it comes from and why contractors and consultants are keen to avoid accepting it. It also includes example clauses and considers whether a contractor should accept them. The amount of design that a contractor or consultant may carry out under their contract or appointment will vary but, regardless of the extent of design undertaken, the principles dictating the standard of care in respect of that design will be the same. Where does the fitness for purpose obligation come from? The fitness for purpose obligation derives from legislation regarding product liability and the standards that are required to be met where goods, materials and/or

Introduction This Practice Note provides a negotiation guide for IT contracts, covering topics relevant to IT services (from support to full outsourcing and anything in between), software licensing and/or hardware purchasing. It sets out key positions across around 30 of the most commonly negotiated issues, and suggests potential compromises and key considerations depending on the scope of the contract, the relative bargaining strengths of the parties, and whether the reader is acting for the customer or supplier. It is intended as a high-level discussion of the issues, prompting the reader to consider what may be needed in the circumstances of any particular deal. Where relevant, specific Practice Notes are also referred to for further information. It is only relevant for business to business transactions. For a discussion of the key negotiation issues arising in services agreements more generally, rather than IT contracts specifically, see Practice Note: Negotiation guide—services agreements. This Practice Note makes reference to example balanced drafting within Precedents: IT services agreement—balanced and Framework agreement for the provision of IT products and services—balanced for some of the topics

We have assumed that the clause in question is included in a business to business contract. You may find the following materials useful: • Practice Note: Force majeure—consequences and contract discharge which has been updated to reflect the current coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. The section ‘Force majeure clauses—interpretation’ considers how definitions of force majeure are interpreted by the courts • Q&As:

Generally, the limitation period for bringing a claim for breach of contract is six years from the date of breach of a ‘simple contract’ (section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980 (LA 1980)). For a list of the number of years within which the principal types of claim