Law360: A federal judge in Chicago is forcing fintech investment company Faes & Co to arbitrate its allegations that a bitcoin miner it hired in October 2021 is no longer generating the valuable cryptocurrency, saying Faes tacitly agreed to a contract with a broad arbitration clause.

This DEED is made on [insert date and month] 20[insert year] Parties 1 [Insert name of first party] of [insert address of first party] ([AB]) and 2 [Insert name of second party] of [insert address of second party] ([BC]). Recitals (A) The Parties intend that this Deed shall be legally binding on them and their respective personal representatives and estates. (B) [Both Parties acknowledge that they have had the benefit of independent legal advice as to the terms and effects of this Deed OR [AB OR BC] has taken independent legal advice as to the terms and effects of this Deed and [BC OR AB] has been advised to do so]. (C) Both Parties have entered into this Deed freely and voluntarily. (D) The Parties [lived together from [date] to [date] OR intend to separate from [date]] and the purpose of this Deed is to create legally binding arrangements as to financial and other matters on their separation. (E) AB and BC have [insert number of children] child[ren] namely [insert child's name] born on [insert date of birth][ and [insert child's name] born on [insert date of birth]] (the child[ren]).[

Tax analysis: In Fulmar Contracting Ltd (in liquidation) v Williams, the High Court held that workers were not liable for underpaid payroll taxes of an insolvent umbrella company, because there was no evidence of a contract of employment and money paid to them was not a transaction at an undervalue.

Dear [insert organisation name]. Notice of Arbitration: [name of contract/vessel/project and date] We act on behalf of [name of client] This is a Notice of Arbitration under section 14 of the Arbitration Act 1996 (AA 1996) issued by [name of claimant] against [name of respondent]. The arbitration is in

Under section 7 of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1986 regulations can be made prescribing terms as to the maintenance, repair and insurance of fixed equipment (these are known as 'the model clauses') in respect of agricultural holdings. The model clauses are deemed to be incorporated in every contract of tenancy of an

Planning conditionality A significant number of property transactions involve rights and obligations which are conditional on, or are triggered by, the grant of (a satisfactory) planning permission. See Precedents: • Contract for sale—freehold vacant possession conditional on planning • Call option—landowner—planning permission to be obtained by buyer—market value • Promotion agreement • Agreement for lease—developer landlord to carry out

We have assumed that the headlease is not a concurrent lease and the sub-lease was granted out of the headlease. At common law, there is no privity of contract nor estate between the head landlord and the sub-tenant and hence the sub-tenant cannot sue the head landlord on any repairing covenants in the lease, unless there is something

Arbitration analysis: This judgment concerns the defendant’s application to stay court proceedings in favour of arbitration pursuant to section 20 of the Arbitration Ordinance (Cap. 609) (the ‘AO’). The present dispute arose over a settlement agreement between the parties (the ‘Settlement Agreement’). The initial contract between the parties (the ‘Contract’) contained an arbitration clause. The court had to determine the effect of the Settlement Agreement on this pre-existing arbitration clause. Applying a commercially-minded approach, the court followed Monde Petroelum SA v Westernzagros Ltd (Monde) and determined that the present dispute arose under the Settlement Agreement. Clause 1.6 of the Settlement Agreement disapplied the arbitration clause in the Contract to such claims. The Settlement Agreement did not otherwise deal with dispute resolution. The court held that the present dispute was not therefore within the ambit of the arbitration clause and the defendant was not entitled to a stay. This is a pragmatic decision which underscores the challenges that can arise when a settlement subsequently breaks down and inconsistent dispute resolution provisions apply. Written by Paul Starr, partner, Felicity Ng, senior associate and Sian Knight, Professional Support Lawyer at King & Wood Mallesons.

STOP PRESS: 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, whereas those begun under the previous legislation (the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), the Utilities Contracts Regulations 2016, the Concession Regulations 2016, and the Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011) must continue to be procured and managed under that legislation. See Practice Note: Introduction to the Procurement Act 2023—PA 2023. This content relates to the Procurement Act 2023 regime This practical guidance is about public procurement under the Procurement Act 2023 (PA 2023). Tender notices replace contract notices under the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (PCR 2015), SI 2015/102. For practical guidance on contract notices under PCR 2015, see Practice Note: Prior information notices and contract notices. What is a tender notice? Under PA 2023, a tender notice is required in order to commence a competitive tendering procedure. PA 2023, s 21 sets out:

This Practice Note looks at Option X12 of the NEC3 and NEC4 contracts, entitled ‘Multiparty Collaboration’ in NEC4 and ‘Partnering’ in NEC3. It is one of the secondary Options in the NEC contracts, which can be selected by the Client (the ‘Employer’ in NEC3) to tailor the contract to its particular needs or the needs of the project (see Practice Note: NEC contracts—introduction). References to the Client include the Employer where NEC3 is used, unless the context requires otherwise. Option X12 was originally derived from the Construction Industry Council’s ‘Guide to Project Team Partnering’. It was first issued in June 2001 as a secondary Option (Option X12), for incorporation into the NEC2 Engineering and Construction Contract (ECC). Like the other secondary Options, Option X12 supplements the Core Clauses and selected main Option. In the case of Option X12, it is incorporated in order to introduce partnering concepts and mechanisms into an NEC contract (see Practice Note: Partnering). Option X12 is largely the same in NEC4 as it was in NEC3, in terms of substance. However,

Delay analysis is a technical method employed by programming/planning specialists to identify the delay and the cause(s) of that delay to the completion date of the works on a project. Delay analysis assists in identifying critical delay and its cause or causes. Contractual entitlement, responsibility and liability must then be determined by applying the terms of the contract and the governing law to those findings. Computer software is a common feature of delay analysis. This Practice Note provides a summary of the different methods of delay analysis commonly used, and the key terminology that arises. It follows the approach taken in the second edition of the Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol (SCL Protocol), at guidance section 11. The SCL Protocol is guidance only: it is neither a contract document nor a statement of law and gives way to the express terms and governing law of the contract. For more information on the SCL Protocol, see Practice Note: Delay and disruption in construction projects—The Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol. There

This Practice Note looks at how the Standard Commercial Property Conditions (Third Edition—2018 Revision) (SCPCs) set out the parties’ respective obligations regarding the physical condition of the property and for the insurance of the property in between exchange and completion. For more detailed guidance on negotiating provisions relating to insurance and risk, see Practice Note: Buyer’s contract negotiation guide—insurance and risk. When does risk pass to the buyer? Under SCPC 8.1, risk passes to the buyer on exchange of contracts (this is also the open contract position). Physical condition of the property Except where the property is being built or converted by the seller, the seller gives no warranty as to the physical condition of the property. SCPC 4.2.1 reflects the general principle of caveat emptor and imposes a duty to inspect on the buyer. The buyer cannot claim against the seller for defects in the property which make the property unfit for purpose unless an express warranty is added to the contract to provide for the risk to remain with the