This Practice Note looks at ground conditions in construction and engineering projects. It considers responsibility for them at common law and looks at the contractual provisions that can be incorporated into building contracts to deal with the contractor encountering adverse ground conditions on the site and allocating responsibility for that risk between the contractor and the employer. It also looks at the position in the JCT, NEC and FIDIC standard form contracts in respect of allocation of ground condition risk. What are ‘ground conditions’? The term ‘ground conditions’ usually refers to the geology, hydrology, soil condition and any contamination of the ground on the site of a construction project. Ground conditions may be man-made or naturally occurring, or a combination of the two. Artificial or man-made conditions or obstructions might include antiquities, landfill, asbestos, old sewers or unexploded ordnances. The expression ‘ground conditions’ does not, however, usually include transitory surface features such as litter or leaves or climatic conditions. The expression ‘ground conditions’ is commonly used in construction contracts but other similar terms are also often

The term ‘ground rent’ is generally used to refer to a low or nominal rent that is paid under a long lease which has been granted at a premium. Ground rent is payable (most frequently annually or bi-annually) by the tenant to its landlord. Ground rent is different to a service charge and is not intended to reimburse the landlord for costs expended. Premises that may be subject to a ground rent include both flats and houses, as well as commercial land and buildings. From 30 June 2022, the Leasehold Reform (Ground Rent) Act 2022 (LR(GR)A 2022) restricts the level of ground rent that a landlord of an individual dwelling can lawfully charge its tenant under a ‘regulated lease’ (as defined by LR(GR)A 2022, s 1) (a Regulated Lease)—see: What is a ‘regulated lease’? In a Regulated Lease, ground rent is deemed to be capped at the specified lawful ‘permitted rent’ (whether or not the lease purports to reserve a higher rent). In most Regulated Leases, the lawful ‘permitted

This Practice Note addresses the circumstances in which the court may give directions concerning the appropriate treatment and questioning of a witness or defendant at a ground rules hearing, the procedural framework for such hearings, and the types of directions that may be given. These directions form part of a broader range of special measures designed to facilitate the effective participation of a vulnerable witness or defendant in criminal proceedings. For further information on other available special measures in criminal proceedings, see Practice Notes: Special measures and Special measures for the accused. The procedural framework for a ground rules hearing is found in Part 3 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909 and further guidance is provided in Part 6 of the Criminal Practice Directions 2023 (CPD 2023). Guidance can also be found in the Crown Court Compendium Part I and the Equal Treatment Bench Book. Duty to facilitate participation In preparing for trial, the court must take every reasonable step to facilitate the participation of any person, including the defendant. Facilitating

What are ground source heat pumps? Ground source heat pumps (GSHPs) are central heating and/or cooling systems that pump heat to or from the ground. GSHPs provide an efficient way to extract stored solar/ground source heat and increase the useful temperature to serve the building heating system. In the summer months heat can be extracted from the building and deposited in the ground thereby cooling the building. This is a common application in China, Japan, the USA and parts of Europe. For more information on global GSHP trends, see the Renewables Global Status Report. How do ground source heat pumps work? Soil temperature can vary considerably depending on the location. In the UK, for example, soil temperature below a depth of 5 m stays constant throughout the year at around 11–12°C. The soil at this depth is effectively a huge thermal store that stores heat absorbed from the sun in the summer and releases it during the winter. GSHPs take this low-temperature energy and concentrate it into more useful, higher-temperature energy to heat water or air inside a

This Practice Note provides an overview of the key issues in the development, financing, construction, operation, and decommissioning of a ground-mounted solar project in the UK. It includes some detail around the use of project finance but, unless the project is of a particularly large size, many sponsors are increasingly prepared to finance development and construction from their own balance sheet, rather than seek recourse to the debt markets. This is particularly the case when the original developer has already sold the project ‘pre-construction’ to an investor. This Practice Note also assumes that the ground-mounted solar project is developed as a standalone project, as opposed to a hybrid project in which the solar technology is co-located with a battery energy storage system (BESS) on the same site, or combined with another generation technology. However, co-location is referenced in this Practice Note: • as a potential issue for consideration by the project sponsors at the outset when devising the structure for the project, or after the project has commenced operation, see Sections: Development phase: key

A person who (whether or not proprietor) by circulars, advertisements or otherwise threatens a person with proceedings of patent, trade mark or design infringement makes a threat of infringement. It is unjustified where no infringement was committed.

This Practice Note sets out the bases on which a jurisdictional challenge may be brought in respect of an adjudication. For further guidance on jurisdictional challenges, see Practice Notes: Making a jurisdictional challenge in an adjudication and The adjudicator’s jurisdiction. In relation to breach of natural justice, see Practice Note: Breach of natural justice in adjudication. Grounds on which a jurisdictional challenge may be brought The below table lists the various grounds upon which a party may base a jurisdictional challenge, and provides links to relevant content on each ground. Ground Guidance There is no legal entitlement to adjudicate—ie there is no statutory right because the contract is not a ‘construction contract’ and there is no contractual right or ad hoc agreement See Practices Notes: The right to adjudicate and What is a construction contract under the HGCRA 1996? There is no (crystallised) dispute between the parties See Practice Note: Adjudication—is there a ‘dispute’? The dispute between the parties has settled See Practice Note: Adjudication—is there a ‘dispute’?, in particular

This Practice Note contains guidance to the provisions contained within CPR 52, CPR PD 52A, CPR PD 52B and CPR PD 52C. It provides general guidance on appeals and covers some of the initial considerations for appellants. It identifies some of the most common grounds of appeal in appeals to the County Court, the High Court and the Court of Appeal. For more information on the scope of this content, see: Civil appeals: general and preliminary considerations—overview. In addition to all and any relevant CPR provisions, practitioners should also comply with any provisions in any court guide applicable to the division in which the case is proceeding, see Practice Note: Civil appeals—court specific guidance. What can be appealed? The appellate court’s function is to deal with 'judgments', 'orders' or 'determinations', or, to use non-technical terms, to deal with the 'result' or 'outcome' of the hearing in the lower court. The appellate court is generally not concerned with the 'findings' or 'reasons' given by the judge in their judgment, although there are ways to seek to challenge

This Checklist examines the grounds for challenge in a public procurement process. Procurement challenges are restricted by time limits and bidders need to be aware of how to rectify any breaches as soon as possible. This Checklist sets out the limitation period under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102 and the relevant factors that can affect the date this starts. This Checklist also pinpoints potential grounds for challenge in relation to Selection Questionnaires, invitations to tender and standstill letters. Limitation in public procurement proceedings Procurement challenges are subject to relatively short limitation periods. It is therefore important that bidders are alive to potential breaches arising during the procurement process itself. Where a breach occurs, an analysis as to what, if any, action the bidder wishes to take must be undertaken quickly. The courts have consistently held that a bidder that chooses to sit on its hands and await the outcome of the procurement process will not be able to pursue out-of-time claims. The PCR 2015, SI 2015/102, regs

Grounds for divorce are the legally recognised reasons a court will accept to dissolve a marriage or, in Ireland, a civil partnership. The concept is used in family law proceedings to determine whether the statutory test for divorce is met.In England and Wales, and in Scotland, the traditional “grounds” (such as adultery or unreasonable behaviour) have been replaced by a no‑fault system: the court need only be satisfied that the marriage has irretrievably broken down, usually evidenced by a party’s statement (Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Act 2020; Divorce (Scotland) Act 1976 as amended).In Northern Ireland and Ireland, legislation still sets out specific factual grounds, including adultery, unreasonable behaviour, desertion and periods of separation, which are relied on to prove irretrievable breakdown (Matrimonial Causes (Northern Ireland) Order 1978; Family Law (Divorce) Act 1996).The term “grounds for divorce” is therefore partly statutory and partly descriptive, and remains in common professional use when advising on divorce petitions, applications, pleadings, evidence and case strategy across all four jurisdictions.

IP analysis: Texas Instruments (TI) applied to the court for an expedited trial on three grounds (para [12]): first ‘to obtain early commercial certainty in the UK to enable alternative arrangements to be considered for that market in the event of an adverse decision in the UPC’; second,‘…to seek to use the UK judgment to influence the outcome in the UPC which would adversely affect the UK market if an injunction were granted’; and third, ‘… to seek to use the UK judgment to influence the long-arm claim for damages on the UK patents’. Network System Technologies (NST) did not instruct counsel to appear at the hearing or even solicitors to be present. However, undertakings had been offered by NST’ solicitors in correspondence in an attempt to obviate the need for the expedited trial and a concession in respect of the ‘long arm’ claims being made in the UPC proceedings. Ground 3 fell away, as NST offered to withdraw its ‘long arm’ claims in respect of its UK designation of the patents from the UPC proceedings, whilst ground 2 was dismissed as a very weak basis for granting expedition and one that would not suffice on its own. The court was though satisfied that TI had made out its case for an expediated trial under ground 1, as the judge agreed with TI that there was an apparent ‘gap’ in the undertakings then offered by NST that would justify expedition in respect of European Patent EP ‘683. However, it is clear that the judge anticipated that the identified gap could be rectified by the parties, prior to the order being sealed and that if it were then there would be no need to expedite the trial. Written by Dr Tim Sampson, barrister, at Lamb Chambers.

EU Law analysis: Marco Mazzeschi, attorney at law and founder of Mazzeschi Srl, considers the grounds for extension of a short-term Schengen visa.